81 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 5
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 15, 2007
Honer v. Ford Motor Company (2007)
The Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgments for Ford Motor Company and Merck & Co. and remanded with directions to deny both motions, so plaintiff Eileen Honer prevailed on appeal. Under Code of Civil Procedure section…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Utah · February 28, 2014
Anderson v. Ford Motor Company (2014)
Joseph Anderson Jr. sued in state court, and the case was removed to federal court in Utah. He alleged asbestos-caused mesothelioma and died of it in 2008. His wife Arva Anderson, as executor, took over as plaintiff. After the case returned from the…
-
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 · Georgia Court of Appeals · March 10, 2022 · in the opinion
Sinyard v. Georgia Power Company (2022)
…to create a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Sinyard was aware of the specific health hazards posed by working with asbestos and the presence and location of asbestos in Ford's Hapeville plant…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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 · 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…
-
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 · May 2, 2016 · in the opinion
Whelan v. Armstrong Int'l (2016)
…Newark, argued the cause on May 2, 2016, and Sean M. Marotta argued the cause on May 16, 2018, for respondent Ford Motor Company (LeClair Ryan, attorneys; Robin Gnudi Kalocsay, Newark, and Michael D. Goldklang, on…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · May 16, 2018 · in the opinion
Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2018)
…cause on May 2, 2016, and Sean M. Marotta argued the cause on May 16, 2018, for respondent Ford Motor Company (LeClair Ryan, attorneys; Robin Gnudi Kalocsay and Michael D. Goldklang, on the brief). Marc S…
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · March 13, 2008 · in the opinion
Woody v. AW Chesterton Company (2008)
…are A.W. Chesterton Company; Advance Auto Parts, Inc.; Bayer CropScience, Inc.; Borg Warner Morse TEC, Inc.; Breeding Insulation Company, Inc.; Breeding Insulation Company, Chattanooga, Inc.; CBS Corporation; CertainTeed Corporation; Crane Company; Ford Motor Company; Foster…
-
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 · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · January 14, 1987 · in the opinion
Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1987)
…defendants should be \jointly and severally' liable." (Plaintiff's Complaint at pp. 7-8). A case decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals subsequent to Abel is Cousineau v. Ford Motor Company, 140 Mich.App. 19…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · September 10, 1973 · in the opinion
Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation (1973)
…Tunks. Dean Prosser was the Reporter for the Restatement of Torts and the quotation from his treatise parallels Section 402A. The language of the majority in Ford Motor Company v. Thompson is consistent with Shamrock v…
-
Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · February 2, 1993 · in the opinion
Harashe v. Flintkote Co. (1993)
…Ackerman v. Globe-Democrat Publishing Company, 368 S.W.2d 469 (Mo.1963) \[4,5\]. W.R. Grace has successor liability for the liabilities of Zonolite. See, id.; Ernst v. Ford Motor Company, 813 S.W…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · November 5, 1997 · in the opinion
Ciletti v. Raymark Indus. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 1997)
…and a reasonable person would conclude that the utility of the product did not outweigh the risk inherent in marketing a product designed in that manner." Denny v. Ford Motor Company, 87 N.Y.2d 248…
-
Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · November 19, 2019 · in the opinion
Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2019)
…mentioning. The product manufacturer (1) "has the knowledge and ability to warn of the dangers of the joint use of the products, especially if the other company's product is a \wear item,'" id. at 472…
-
Court case · Maryland Appellate Court · February 8, 2024 · in the opinion
Basil-Flippen v. General Electric Company (2024)
…it is merely incorporated into something larger, the strict liability will be found to carry through to the ultimate user or consumer," rather than to the assembler. Id. In Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 119 Md…