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

Search

33 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 2

  1. 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…

  2. 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…

  3. 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…

  4. 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…

  5. 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…

  6. 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…

  7. 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…

  8. 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…

  9. 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…

  10. 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…

  11. Court case · Connecticut Supreme Court · August 12, 2008 · in the opinion

    Deschenes v. Transco, Inc. (2008)

    …reasonable probability" that emphysema was caused by employment "solely and independently of all other causes"; aggravation of existing emphysema is compensable only to extent of aggravation); Kingery v. Ford Motor Co., 116 Mich.App. 606, 619…

  12. 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…

  13. Court case · Connecticut Supreme Court · November 27, 2007 · in the opinion

    Deschenes v. Transco, Inc. (2007)

    …reasonable probability" that emphysema was caused by employment "solely and independently of all other causes"; aggravation of existing emphysema is compensable only to extent of aggravation); Kingery v. Ford Motor Co., 116 Mich.App. 606, 619…

  14. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 25, 1982 · in the opinion

    Froud v. Celotex Corporation (1982)

    …as indicated by the recent single personal injury jury verdict in the amount of $127.8 million, of which $125 million was for punitive damages. (Richard Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., Superior Court, Santa Ana, Cal.…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota · March 28, 1990 · in the opinion

    Puppe By Puppe v. AC and S., Inc. (1990)

    …955 (N.D.Tex. 1978) ($10 million punitive damage award overturned by court); Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 119 Cal.App.3d 757, 174 Cal.Rptr. 348 (1981) (upheld trial court's reduction in punitive damage…

  16. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · January 25, 1991 · in the opinion

    Moran v. G. & WH Corson, Inc. (1991)

    …id., and "view trade relations realistically rather than mythically." Verge v. Ford Motor Co., 581 F.2d 384 (3rd Cir.1978). Thus in determining who may be "primarily responsible" [\125] and required to indemnify in a…

  17. Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 1992 · in the opinion

    Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Watson (1992)

    …984, 989, 128 S.E.2d 273, 277 (1962) (citations omitted). See also Ford Motor Co. v. Phelps, 239 Va. 272, 276, 389 S.E.2d 454, 457 (1990); General Motors Corp. v. Lupica, 237 Va…

  18. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · February 14, 2005 · in the opinion

    Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc. (2005)

    …103 Wash.2d 768, 774, 698 P.2d 77 (1985). ANALYSIS In Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969), the Washington Supreme Court adopted the Restatement (Second) of Torts…

  19. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · November 18, 1993 · in the opinion

    Srite v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1993)

    …unpersuaded by plaintiffs' argument. The zero damages rule conflicts with the standard of review articulated by the Texas Supreme Court in the case of Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex…

  20. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · July 22, 2015 · in the opinion

    Baumgartner v. American Standard, Inc. (2015)

    …C. § 2315.21(B). Here, there is clearly a conflict as to the assessment of punitive damages. See e.g., Dodson v. Ford Motor Co., 2006 WL 2642199, at [\2] (R.I. Super. Sept. 5, 2006…