No fee unless we recover compensation for your family Text size 833-4-ASBESTOS (833-427-2378) Free Case Review

Search

190 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 10

  1. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · March 14, 2014

    Durham v. Ford Motor Company (2014)

    …judgment and partial summary judgment for Ford Motor Company on both the plaintiff's appeal and Ford's cross-appeal, rejecting the Durham estate's premises and products claims and Ford's request for total immunity…

  2. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · June 29, 2012

    Dixon v. Ford Motor Company (2012)

    The Court of Special Appeals vacated the judgments for the Dixon plaintiffs against Ford Motor Company and remanded for a new trial, because the trial court should not have admitted the plaintiffs' expert's causation opinion…

  3. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · October 7, 2011

    Rehm v. Ford Motor Company (2011)

    The Court of Appeals affirmed the jury verdict and judgment for Ford Motor Company against the Rehm family, and held Ford's cross-appeal moot while addressing its merits. Evidence rulings are reviewed for abuse of…

  4. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · July 15, 2020

    Coates v. Ford Motor Company (2020)

    The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the judgment for Ford Motor Company after retrial, rejecting the Coates estate's challenges to the denial of partial summary judgment, the denial of a new trial, and the refusal…

  5. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2012

    Campbell v. Ford Motor Company (2012)

    The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment for plaintiff Honer (continued by her daughter Mary Campbell) against Ford, holding Ford owed her no duty, so Ford prevailed. Under the Rowland factors as clarified in Cabral, an…

  6. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 29, 2011

    Adams v. Ford Motor Company (2011)

    …so Ford Motor Company keeps its award of costs including $167,570 in expert witness fees after its defense verdict. A prevailing defendant's section 998 offer is presumed reasonable when it wins a more favorable…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · October 28, 2022

    Walls v. Ford Motor Company (2022)

    …of the estate of Robie W. Walls, brought a wrongful death action in federal court in North Carolina against Ford Motor Company and other defendants. The opinion refers to Mr. Walls's Navy service on the…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 5, 2017

    Petitpas v. Ford Motor Company (2017)

    …of Appeal affirmed the judgment for Exxon Mobil, Ford and Rossmoor, rejecting plaintiffs' challenges to the summary adjudication for Exxon, the nonsuit for Rossmoor, the jury instructions on Ford, and the defense verdict for Exxon. An…

  9. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · January 31, 2019

    Knecht v. Ford Motor Co. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2019)

    The Delaware Superior Court denied Ford Motor Company's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, its alternative motion for a new trial, and its motion for a new trial or remittitur, leaving the…

  10. 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…

  11. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · August 28, 2024

    Day v. 3M Company Inc. (2024)

    …Island Superior Court denied summary judgment to Ford Motor Company and to Graybar Electric Company, so the estate's claims against both go forward, and it also denied Ford's motion for partial entry of separate…

  12. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 8, 2010

    Reaser v. AW Chesterton Company (2010)

    Robert Reaser served in the Navy from 1951 to 1971, working as a pipefitter and welder on Navy vessels, including time in San Diego and Long Beach. He later lived in Florida and worked in construction and on automobiles. He was diagnosed with…

  13. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · March 29, 2010

    Asbury v. AW Chesterton Company (2010)

    Carlie Asbury, diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2006, and her husband Thomas sued thirty defendants in Rhode Island Superior Court in 2007. They alleged she was exposed to asbestos in Iowa, Colorado and Wyoming. In Iowa she swept dust and debris in…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · January 25, 2019

    Johansen v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2019)

    The magistrate judge recommended granting Ford Motor Company's summary judgment motion on the negligence, failure-to-warn and punitive damages claims, because Johansen's brake exposure was de minimis and Ford owed no duty to…

  15. 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…

  16. 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…

  17. 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 …

  18. 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…

  19. 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…

  20. Court case · Kentucky Supreme Court · August 23, 2007 · in the opinion

    General Elec. Co. v. Cain (2007)

    …judgment as a matter of law. Ford Motor Company Ford Motor Company designed, manufactured, and sold motor vehicles during the period from 1975 to 1982. Rehm worked at two Ford plants in Louisville while employed by…