144 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 8
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 26, 2014
Scott v. Ford Motor Company (2014)
The court affirmed the judgment and compensatory damages for Patrick and Sharon Scott against Ford Motor Co. on the failure to warn claims, and reversed the ruling that barred punitive damages, remanding for a trial on…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 8, 1998
Ford Motor v. Wood (1998)
…of Special Appeals reversed the judgment for Mrs. Wood against Ford Motor Company for insufficient proof that her husband was exposed to Ford's brake and clutch products, and affirmed the judgment for the Grewe plaintiffs…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013
Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer (2013)
The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the jury verdict and judgment for the estate against Ford and Honeywell (Bendix) because of the "substantial contributing factor" jury instructions, and remanded for further proceedings under a multiple-sufficient…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · September 15, 2023
Munna v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (2023)
Joseph Munna sued American Honda, many other vehicle and parts companies, and others over lung cancer he attributed to asbestos. This decision did not address liability. Munna asked the New York County Supreme Court to try…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · February 21, 2017
Fish v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2017)
The magistrate judge granted in part and denied in part Ford Motor Company's motion for a protective order limiting the plaintiffs' 54 Rule 30(b)(6) areas of inquiry, largely for Ford, allowed the plaintiffs…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · August 20, 2015
Oddo v. Asbestos Corporation Ltd. (2015)
…affirmed Ford's liability, reallocated fault to Ford 65%, Union Carbide 25% and Higgins 10%, and amended the survival damages award against Ford, so the plaintiffs lost against Southern Talc but kept their judgment against Ford…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · February 6, 2020
Schrank v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (2020)
The trial court granted Ford Motor Company's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint and cross claims against Ford, finding the plaintiffs' experts failed to show specific causation. In a toxic tort asbestos case…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · August 10, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2018)
(Ford MTE Castleman at 6.) However, the court notes that pursuant to Rule 703, an expert may disclose otherwise inadmissible underlying facts or data "if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · July 31, 2002
In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. (2002)
Tens of thousands of people sued in state courts across the country, claiming that asbestos in friction products such as brake pads gave them or their relatives mesothelioma, lung, laryngeal or esophageal cancer, or asbestosis. They sued makers and…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 10, 2006
Berger v. Amchem Prods. (2006)
The court denied DaimlerChrysler's motions (joined by Ford and General Motors) to preclude evidence that brake and clutch dust causes asbestos disease, to dismiss the complaints, and for a Frye hearing, so the plaintiffs (Berger…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 14, 2003
Cossman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2003)
The Court of Appeal affirmed the nonsuit for the friction-product defendants (DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Mercedes-Benz USA, Volkswagen of America and Pneumo Abex), holding that Indiana's two-year statute of limitations barred the Cossmans' claims…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · September 17, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2018)
…the brands of brakes he worked on at Dexter, Mr. Jack testified that "\[s\]ome of them \[were\] Ford." (Id. at 131:17-20.) When Plaintiffs' counsel asked Mr. Jack if he used the arc grinder …
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Jack v. Dco, LLC (2019)
…those he encountered at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard." (Resp. DCo at 11; Resp. Ford at 12.) In particular, Plaintiffs emphasize that Mr. Jack testified in his deposition that, while he was working at the Shipyard…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 20, 2019
Temperino v. Amchem Prods. (2019)
…without prejudice to renewal at trial; Ford's motion was marked withdrawn. Conflicting expert reports on whether exposure caused lung cancer raise credibility issues that cannot be resolved on summary judgment. The court deferred ruling on…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion
Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)
…exposed to asbestos from Ford vehicles, plaintiffs' claims stand. Accordingly, Ford's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. v. Navistar, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment Navistar, Inc. (f/k/a International Harvester Company) contends that…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022
Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)
The district court denied the summary judgment motions of BMW, Volkswagen and Honeywell (joined by Ford, Pneumo Abex and Morse TEC) and denied the defendants' motions in limine, so the plaintiffs' causation experts could testify, limited…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 1, 2022
Labarre v. Bienville Auto Parts Inc. (2022)
…It denied the motion on negligence, because Bienville's two witnesses conflicted on whether the company knew the brakes contained asbestos and that asbestos was dangerous. It also denied the motion on the sophisticated-user defense…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 8, 2012
Adler v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2012)
Twenty-two plaintiffs, all represented by the same lawyers, sued more than eighty defendants in New York County for asbestos-related injuries or deaths. Seven had lung cancer, fourteen had pleural mesothelioma, and Glenda Vega had peritoneal…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 30, 2013 · in the opinion
Steiner v. Volkswagen Group OF America, Inc. (2013)
…Yukevich, Steven D. Smelser, Patricia Ball; Dykema Gossett, John M. Thomas, Tamara A. Bush, for Appellant Ford Motor Company. Herzfeld & Rubin, Craig L. Winterman, Tara-Jane Flynn; Carroll, Burdick & McDonough, Laurie J. Hepler, Nathaniel K. Fisher…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 5, 2019 · in the opinion
Schindler v. Dravo Basic Materials Company (2019)
…additional asbestos fiber could constitute a specific cause of plaintiff's mesothelioma.\[51\] Plaintiff contends that Dr. Harrison has employed the same methodology as the expert in Michel v. Ford Motor Company. See No. 18-4738…