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

Search

129 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 7

  1. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 26, 2014

    Scott v. Ford Motor Company (2014)

    The court affirmed the judgment and compensatory damages for Patrick and Sharon Scott against Ford Motor Co. on the failure to warn claims, and reversed the ruling that barred punitive damages, remanding for a trial on…

  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 · 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…

  4. 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…

  5. 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…

  6. 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…

  7. 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…

  8. Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 10, 2006

    Berger v. Amchem Prods. (2006)

    The court denied DaimlerChrysler's motions (joined by Ford and General Motors) to preclude evidence that brake and clutch dust causes asbestos disease, to dismiss the complaints, and for a Frye hearing, so the plaintiffs (Berger…

  9. Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 14, 2003

    Cossman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2003)

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the nonsuit for the friction-product defendants (DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Mercedes-Benz USA, Volkswagen of America and Pneumo Abex), holding that Indiana's two-year statute of limitations barred the Cossmans' claims…

  10. 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 …

  11. 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…

  12. 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…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …exposed to asbestos from Ford vehicles, plaintiffs' claims stand. Accordingly, Ford's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. v. Navistar, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment Navistar, Inc. (f/k/a International Harvester Company) contends that…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 1, 2022

    Labarre v. Bienville Auto Parts Inc. (2022)

    …It denied the motion on negligence, because Bienville's two witnesses conflicted on whether the company knew the brakes contained asbestos and that asbestos was dangerous. It also denied the motion on the sophisticated-user defense…

  15. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · December 4, 2012 · in the opinion

    Melford v. Abex Corporation (2012)

    …Corp.; Deere & Co.; Dorsey Trailers Inc.; Eaton Corp.; Fontaine Trailer Co.; Ford Motor Co.; Fruehauf Corp.; Gardner Denver Inc.; Genuine Parts Company Inc.; The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; Goulds Pumps Incorporated; Grinnel Corp.; Harley Davidson Inc.…

  16. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 5, 2019 · in the opinion

    Schindler v. Dravo Basic Materials Company (2019)

    …additional asbestos fiber could constitute a specific cause of plaintiff's mesothelioma.\[51\] Plaintiff contends that Dr. Harrison has employed the same methodology as the expert in Michel v. Ford Motor Company. See No. 18-4738…

  17. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · February 11, 2015 · in the opinion

    Latter v. 3M Company (2015)

    …successor to Lipe Rollway Corporation; FORD MOTOR COMPANY; GKN ROCKFORD, INCORPORATED, individually and as successor to Rockford Clutch; GALION, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION; GEORGIA PACIFIC, LLC; GOODRICH CORPORATION, f/k/a B.F. Goodrich Company; HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL,…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 8, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Company (2022)

    …Insurance Company, Bayer CropScience, Inc., BMW of North America, LLC, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London and London Market Companies, Eagle, Inc., Ford Motor Company, Foster Wheeler LLC, General Electric Company, ViacomCBS Inc., Gulf Engineering Company…

  19. 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…

  20. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 21, 2014 · in the opinion

    Beckering v. Shell Oil Co. (2014)

    …by a family member who laundered asbestos-contaminated work clothes. In Campbell, the plaintiff filed a premises liability action against Ford Motor Company, alleging she contracted mesothelioma as a result of her secondary exposure to asbestos…