68 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 4
-
Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · June 10, 2008
Ford Motor Company v. Miller (2008)
The Texas Court of Appeals reversed the $10,000,000 jury verdict and rendered judgment for Ford Motor Company, holding Ford owed no duty to Carolyn Miller and that John Roland had no compensable injury or…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · March 22, 2019
Ford Motor Company v. Sheets (2019)
…trial court's one-sentence order denying Ford Motor Company's summary judgment motion and remanded for the trial court to state the basis for its ruling, leaving Ford's up-the-ladder immunity claim undecided…
-
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…
-
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 · 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;…
-
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, Western District of Washington · August 10, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2018)
(Ford MTE Castleman at 6.) However, the court notes that pursuant to Rule 703, an expert may disclose otherwise inadmissible underlying facts or data "if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially…
-
Court case · Delaware Supreme Court · July 22, 2019
Richards v. Copes-Vulcan, Inc. (2019)
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Copes-Vulcan, Ford and Goodyear and the denial of the Richards' request to supplement their expert report or for reargument. Under Ohio law, Ohio Rev. Code § 2307.96…
-
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 …
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Jack v. Dco, LLC (2019)
…those he encountered at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard." (Resp. DCo at 11; Resp. Ford at 12.) In particular, Plaintiffs emphasize that Mr. Jack testified in his deposition that, while he was working at the Shipyard…
-
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 · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 25, 2005
Rehm v. Navistar International (2005)
…the appellees (including Allied Chemical, DuPont, Ford, GE, Kentucky Utilities Ghent Powerhouse, LG&E Cane Run and Mill Creek), Louisville millwright Facilities owned by the appellees (including Allied Chemical, DuPont, Ford, GE, Kentucky Utilities Ghent Powerhouse…
-
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 · Tennessee Court of Appeals · July 22, 2019 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2019)
…J., dissenting). In some cases, it has proven difficult to apply. See, e.g., Stockton v. Ford Motor Company, No. W2016-01175-COA-R3-CV, 2017 WL 2021760, at [\12]-15 (Tenn. Ct. App., filed May…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 23, 2021 · in the opinion
Brindell v. Carlisle Industrial Brake and Friction Inc. (2021)
…death."\[128\] During oral argument, Removing Defendants cited Michel v. Ford Motor Company\[129\] and Smith v. Union Carbide\[130\] to support these arguments. When conducting a summary inquiry, the Court determines only whether the plaintiff…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 24, 2008 · in the opinion
Cunningham v. Buffalo Pumps, Inc. (2008)
…provide the replacements for such parts, they cannot be held liable for Cunningham's injuries. (See, e.g., Vandermark v. Ford Motor Company, supra, 61 Cal.2d at p. 262; Wiler v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co…
-
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…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · April 3, 2017 · in the opinion
Woo v. General Electric Company (2017)
…9\]. . . . In addition, there are some cases where the combination of two sound products creates a dangerous condition, and both manufacturers have a duty to warn. \[Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 119 Md. App. 1, 34…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · February 19, 2020 · in the opinion
Coogan v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec Inc. (2020)
…We agree with the Coogans. a. Legal Principles In Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., the Supreme Court adopted the rule of strict liability for product manufacturers stated in § 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts (Am…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 25, 2009 · in the opinion
Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc. (2009)
…2001) 26 Cal.4th 465, 478-479 \[110 Cal.Rptr.2d 370, 28 P.3d 116\], quoting Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964) 61 Cal.2d 256, 261 \[37 Cal.Rptr. 896, 391 P.2d 168…