18 results for “Ford Motor Company”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · March 19, 2018
Gorton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (2018)
…Nevada Bell and AT & T, Inc., found jurisdiction over Ford and AT & T Corp., but dismissed the claims against those two without prejudice as conclusory, allowing plaintiffs to amend. A foreign corporation registered in Pennsylvania consents…
-
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 · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 11, 2012
Gaskill v. Abex Corporation (2012)
…Honeywell, Volkswagen and Ford prevailed. Dismissal with prejudice is a permissible sanction where a party commits fraud on the court by deliberately lying about his work history in discovery and no lesser sanction would suffice. The…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · April 3, 1992 · in the opinion
Sealover v. Carey Canada (1992)
…in Burke, supra, leave no doubt that the actual knowledge standard applies to this case. See also: Tunis Brothers Company, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company, 952 F.2d 715, 740 (3d Cir.1991). Thus, to recover…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · June 20, 2017
Altman v. Ford Motor Co. (In re New York City Asbetos Litigation, 2017)
…Benicia Pump Repair Benicia 1950s-1980s; helper in boiler and furnace removal and installation stepfather's boiler and furnace business 1950s; worker at a construction products company 1970s; handyman 1970s and 1980s; union carpenter various construction…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · January 27, 2009 · in the opinion
Martin v. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company (2009)
…II. ANALYSIS A. Standard of Review As this is a diversity action, Kentucky substantive law applies. Gahafer v. Ford Motor Co., 328 F.3d 859, 861 (6th Cir. 2003). Procedurally, federal standards for summary judgment govern…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 27, 2021 · in the opinion
Morgan v. JM Manufacturing Co., Inc. (2021)
…mind. Morgan's argument relies on and quotes from Romo v. Ford Motor Co. (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 1115 \[122 Cal.Rptr.2d 139\] (Romo), vacated on other grounds in Ford Motor Co. v. Romo…
-
Court case · Oregon Court of Appeals · March 4, 2009 · in the opinion
Mason v. Mt. St. Joseph, Inc. (2009)
…474, 155 P.3d 52 (2007); Simonsen v. Ford Motor Co., 196 Or.App. 460, 102 P.3d 710 (2004) (liberal construction of operative pleading in assessing sufficiency of claims under applicable statute of limitations). In…
-
Court case · Texas Supreme Court · July 11, 2014 · in the opinion
Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. (2014)
…1965). \[44\] RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL HARM § 26 (2010). \[45\] See id. § 26 cmt. j. \[46\] 232 S.W.3d at 772. \[47\] Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer, 285 Va. 141…
-
Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · June 19, 2012 · in the opinion
Wagner v. Bondex International, Inc. (2012)
…Montgomery, 331 S.W.3d at 335. "Whether the plaintiff made a submissible case is a question of law subject to de novo review." Moore v. Ford Motor Co., 332 S.W.3d 749, 756 (Mo…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 27, 2009 · in the opinion
Mahoney v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC (2009)
…supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 795-796; Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co. (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 757, 798-799.) Generally, it is improper for counsel to argue facts outside the evidence, or to engage…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · November 18, 2009 · in the opinion
Estate of Hicks v. Dana Companies, LLC (2009)
…design choice, and not on the attributes of the product itself." Id. at 342, 528 A.2d at 594 (citing Lenhardt v. Ford Motor Co., 102 Wash.2d 208, 683 P.2d 1097 (1984)). Accordingly, the…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · February 19, 2020 · in the opinion
Roverano v. John Crane, Inc. (2020)
…actual, product-specific causation in many asbestos cases, the courts have come to accept abstract assessments of increased risk as proxies for traditional substantial-factor causation. See Rost v. Ford Motor Co., 637 Pa. 625, 668…
-
Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · December 23, 2009 · in the opinion
Honeywell International, Inc. v. Guilder (2009)
…redact this portion of the letter for use at trial. See MCI Exp., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 832 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Next, we turn to the second issue concerning the exclusion…
-
Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · August 26, 2010 · in the opinion
Georgia-Pacific Corporation v. Bostic (2010)
…232 S.W.3d at 770 (quoting Union Pump Co. v. Allbritton, 898 S.W.2d 773, 775 (Tex. 1995)); see also Ford Motor Co. v. Ledesma, 242 S.W.3d 32, 46 (Tex. 2007). Thus…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · January 21, 1994 · in the opinion
Tabolt v. Flintkote Co. (In re New York Asbestos Litigation, 1994)
…under N.Y.Labor Law § 200 to warn those lawfully on the premises of hidden dangers of which it knew or should have known. Gasperino v. Larsen Ford, Inc., 300 F.Supp. 1182 (S.D.N…
-
Court case · Connecticut Appellate Court · October 13, 2021 · in the opinion
Poce v. O & G Industries, Inc. (2021)
…those offered by the moving party ... such allegations must be supported by counteraffidavits or other documentary submissions that controvert the evidence offered in support of summary judgment." GMAC Mortgage, LLC v. Ford, 144 Conn. App. 165…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · April 30, 2015 · in the opinion
Rocha v. Brown & Gould, LLP (2015)
…Burlington, which cites Lish, involved false statements made by an applicant to an insurance company in an insurance application, and the case dealt with a negligent misrepresentation claim [\86] under § 552 of the Restatement (Second) of…