32 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 2
-
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 · 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 · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · May 11, 2018
Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Coates (2018)
The Court of Special Appeals reversed the judgments for Coates against Mack Trucks and Ford on negligent failure to warn, and reversed the judgments for CertainTeed on Mack's and Ford's cross-claims, remanding for…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · July 1, 2019 · in the opinion
Noll v. Special Electric Company, Inc. (2019)
…INC; FORD MOTOR COMPANY; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; GEORGIA-PACIFIC LLC; HERCULES INCORPORATED; HONEWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.; INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION f/k/a THE CARBORUNDUM COMPANY; INGERSOLL-RAND COMPANY; J-M MANUFACTURING COMPANY INC.; KAISER GYPSUM COMPANY INC.…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 14, 2014 · in the opinion
McGuire v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014)
…hazard of the occupational disease." Here, Bill alleged that his last occupational exposure occurred while he worked for Ford Motor Company from 1978 until 2002. The second is the applicable statute of repose. Prior to 1986…
-
Court case · Washington Supreme Court · June 8, 2017 · in the opinion
Noll v. American Biltrite Inc. (2017)
…Inc.; Ford Motor Company; General Electric Company; Georgia-Pacific LLC; Hercules Incorporated; Honeywell International Inc.; Industrial Holdings Corporation f/k/a The Carborundum Company; Ingersoll-Rand Company; J-M Manufacturing Company Inc.; Kaiser Gypsum Company Inc.…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 25, 2014 · in the opinion
Lovelace v. Pneumo Abex LLC (2014)
Ford Motor Company During Trial Abex contends the judgment must be reversed "based on the \[trial\] court's prejudicial decision to apply Campbell mid-trial." Abex characterizes "the publication of Campbell" as "\[a\]n unexpected event…
-
Court case · Minnesota Court of Appeals · July 13, 2020 · in the opinion
Backe v. AW Kuettel & Sons, Inc. (2020)
…Ct. 916 (2020). The plaintiff was injured in a car accident in Minnesota in a 1994 Ford vehicle and filed a complaint against defendant Ford Motor Company asserting claims for products liability, negligence, and breach of…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 28, 2010 · in the opinion
Johnson v. Certainteed Corporation (2010)
…Vandermark held that the lower court erred in granting a nonsuit on the plaintiff's claim that Ford Motor Company (Ford) could not be strictly liable for a product defect simply because it relied on its…
-
Court case · Georgia Court of Appeals · March 20, 2012 · in the opinion
Union Carbide Corporation v. Fields (2012)
…Defendants appeal the trial court's ruling only with respect to the following 16 nonparty entities: Georgia Power Company ("Georgia Power"); Ford Motor Company ("Ford"); Genuine Parts Company ("Genuine Parts"); Chrysler LLC ("Chrysler"); General Motors ("GM")…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 10, 2013 · in the opinion
Webb v. Special Electric Company, Inc. (2013)
…63; Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964) 61 Cal.2d 256, 262-263.) Strict liability is justified as a means to spread the costs of injuries resulting from dangerous and defective products among the products' manufacturers…
-
Court case · Delaware Superior Court · September 28, 2020 · in the opinion
Gibbs v. 84 Lumber Company (2020)
…238, 242 (4th Cir. 1971) (finding that the duty-to-warn arises when the user may not realize the potential danger of a product))); see Watson v. Ford Motor Co., 389 S.C. 434, 444, 699…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · December 28, 2000 · in the opinion
Hollingsworth v. Connor (2000)
…uniform, but an "injury" does not arise until symptoms are manifested while the harm for a fatal and irreversible "disease" arises as soon as the cellular change develops. Our recent decisions in Ford \[Motor Co. v…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · February 26, 2014 · in the opinion
Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Co. (2014)
…a substantial factor causing an injury. Id., 177 Ill.Dec. 379, 603 N.E.2d at 455-57. Cf. Ford Motor [\920] Co. v. Boomer, 285 Va. 141, 736 S.E.2d 724, 729-30 (2013)…
-
Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · August 31, 1990 · in the opinion
Celotex Corp. v. Tate (1990)
…Manufacturing Company products.\[1\] When considering a "no evidence," "insufficient evidence," or "against the great weight and preponderance" point of error, we will follow the well-established test set forth in Pool v. Ford Motor Co…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · August 31, 1982 · in the opinion
Neal v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd. (1982)
…paying compensatory damages rather than changing the business practice which would result in extra costs. See, e.g., Wangen v. Ford Motor Co., 97 Wis.2d 260, 294 N.W.2d 437, 451-457 (1980); Sturm…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · March 24, 2020 · in the opinion
Schrader v. Ameron International Corporation (2020)
…Ford Motor Co., 160 A.3d 1135 (Del. 2017) (unpublished disposition at 2017 WL 1422626 [\3]). In Walls, the decedent was exposed to asbestos from, among other sources, brake changes performed on Ford vehicles in the…
-
Court case · Florida Supreme Court · October 15, 2018 · in the opinion
DeLisle v. Crane Co. (2018)
…exposed to asbestos-containing products from the following nonparty defendants: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC; A.W. Chesterton Co.; Ford Motor Co.; Honeywell International, Inc., f/k/a Allied Signal, as successor in interest to Allied Corp.…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 21, 2014 · in the opinion
Izell v. Union Carbide Corporation (2014)
…(2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 655, 690-691.) As our Supreme Court stated in Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1191, "\[t\]o consider the defendant's entire course of conduct in setting…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 19, 2020 · in the opinion
Mata v. Liberty Utilities (park Water) Corp. (2020)
…Ford Motor Co. (1982) 32 Cal.3d 388, 402, a former Ford engineer and manager testified that Ford knew of the problem with the brakes on its Continental models because Ford had received customer and dealer…