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

Search

79 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 4

  1. 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…

  2. 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…

  3. 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…

  4. 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…

  5. 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…

  6. 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…

  7. 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…

  8. 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 …

  9. 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…

  10. 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…

  11. 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…

  12. 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…

  13. 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…

  14. 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.…

  15. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · June 29, 2015 · in the opinion

    Noll v. American Biltrite, Inc. (2015)

    …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…

  16. 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.…

  17. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · September 30, 2018 · in the opinion

    Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2018)

    …DEHAY & ELLISTON LLP, pro hac vice, Michael J. Madderra, BENNETT BIGELOW & LEEDOM & Richard D. Ross, BENNETT BIGELOW & LEEDOM. Ford Motor Company, Defendant, represented by Harry S. Johnson, WHITEFORD TAYLOR PRESTON LLP, pro hac vice, Daniel K…

  18. 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…

  19. Court case · New York Supreme Court · April 14, 2017 · in the opinion

    Evans v. 3M Co. (2017)

    …friction products sold or distributed by defendant Ford Motor Company" (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig, 2017 Slip Op 01523 at 5, supra).\[2\] Those products were brakes, clutches and manifold gaskets in Ford vehicles…

  20. 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…