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

Search

232 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 12

  1. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · May 11, 2023

    LaFever v. Ford Motor Company (2023)

    The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order granting plaintiff Trudy LaFever a new trial after a jury verdict for Ford Motor Company, finding no abuse of discretion. A trial court's grant of a…

  2. 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…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · January 7, 2019

    Michel v. Ford Motor Company (2019)

    The court denied Ford's and Cummins's motions to exclude or limit the expert testimony of Dr. Staggs, Dr. Finkelstein and Christopher Depasquale, so the plaintiffs' experts may testify. An expert's specific-causation opinion…

  4. 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…

  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 · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 16, 2013

    Webber v. Ford Motor Company (2013)

    The Superior Court reversed the trial court's orders opening and vacating the judgment entered for Ford, Abex and Honeywell and granting a mistrial, and denied the Webbers' motion to quash, so the defense judgment stood…

  7. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · May 19, 2014

    Rost v. Ford Motor Company (2014)

    The Superior Court affirmed the judgment for Richard and Joyce Rost against Ford Motor Company, rejecting Ford's appeal and the Rosts' cross-appeal. Betz v. Pneumo Abex does not bar all 'any exposure' expert opinion…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · January 7, 2019

    Michel v. Ford Motor Company (2019)

    The court denied Cummins Inc.'s and Ford Motor Company's joint motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiffs (Michel's survivors) keep their claims against both defendants. Plaintiffs must show exposure to asbestos from the…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 20, 2019

    Michel v. Ford Motor Co. (2019)

    …court granted Ford's motion to quash the trial subpoena to Matthew Fyie, granted plaintiffs leave to designate Fyie's deposition testimony, and granted Ford's motion to strike plaintiffs' late objections to Ford's counterdesignations…

  10. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · May 23, 2019

    Michel v. Ford Motor Co. (2019)

    …court granted Ford Motor Company's motion to dismiss only as to plaintiffs' wrongful death employer liability claim, which was dismissed with prejudice, and otherwise denied it, so plaintiffs' other wrongful death claims against Ford continue…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 20, 2019

    Michel v. Ford Motor Co. (2019)

    …premises and employer liability claims against Ford, found strict products liability claims already pleaded, and said a continuance would cure prejudice to Ford. A party seeking to amend after the scheduling-order deadline must show good…

  12. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · February 3, 2011

    Welsh v. Ford Motor Co. (2011)

    …new trial, so the widow Sylvia Welsh won and Ford Motor Company lost. A workers' compensation claimant must show by a preponderance that the disease was contracted through injurious exposure in the course of employment. Coworker…

  13. 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…

  14. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · December 5, 2005

    Snyder v. Ford Motor Co. (2005)

    …Workers' Compensation; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: Clingerman facility; Ford Motor Company Lima plant; General Dynamics Lima facility; General Dynamics facility, Lima; Clingerman facility, Bellefontaine; Ford Motor Company, Lima employee General Dynamics facility Lima 1984-1993;…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · September 27, 2019

    Ratcliff v. American Honda Motor Co. Inc. (2019)

    The magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment to Ford, Brenntag Specialties, Whittaker Clark & Daniels and Honeywell because Ratcliff's claims were time-barred, and recommended terminating the other pending motions as moot. Under North Carolina law…

  16. 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…

  17. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · March 24, 2022

    Marino v. Abex Corporation (2022)

    The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment for plaintiff Deborah Marino against Ford Motor Company, upholding the discovery sanctions; it found one hearsay ruling erroneous but harmless. A trial court may sanction a party for violating a…

  18. 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…

  19. Court case · New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division · February 26, 2015

    Finerty v. Abex Corp. (2015)

    …the denial of Ford USA's motion for summary judgment, but reversed the denial of Ford UK's motion and dismissed the complaint against Ford UK for lack of personal jurisdiction. A parent company is not…

  20. 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…