61 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 · Tennessee Court of Appeals · May 12, 2017
Stockton v. Ford Motor Company (2017)
The Court of Appeals vacated the $3.4 million judgment for Joyce and Ronnie Stockton against Ford Motor Company and remanded, because the jury instructions and verdict form omitted required questions on whether the product was…
-
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…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · July 25, 2013
Dixon v. Ford Motor Company (2013)
…the intermediate appellate court, reinstated the jury verdicts for the Dixon plaintiffs against Ford Motor Company, and reversed the trial court's judgment for Ford on its cross-claim against Georgia-Pacific, which won back the…
-
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…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 5, 2017
Petitpas v. Ford Motor Company (2017)
…of Appeal affirmed the judgment for Exxon Mobil, Ford and Rossmoor, rejecting plaintiffs' challenges to the summary adjudication for Exxon, the nonsuit for Rossmoor, the jury instructions on Ford, and the defense verdict for Exxon. An…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana · March 27, 2014
Hayes v. Asbestos, Corp., Ltd. (2014)
…Ford Motor Company's Rule 12(b)(6) motion, holding that the Louisiana Products Liability Act was the plaintiffs' exclusive remedy against Ford and dismissing the non-LPLA claims and the punitive damages claim against Ford…
-
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…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · August 27, 2014
Smith v. Bmw OF North America LLC (2014)
…affirmed the trial court's summary judgment for Ford Motor Company and Borg-Warner Corporation, against the estate of Paul Rowland, represented by Amy Smith as executrix. A company is liable as an apparent manufacturer under…
-
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…
-
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 · Texas Court of Appeals · September 23, 2004
In re Sears, Roebuck and Co. (2004)
The court of appeals conditionally granted Sears and Ford's mandamus petitions, ordering the trial court to vacate its discovery orders because the requests for workers' compensation files, board minutes and violation records were overly broad…
-
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 · Rhode Island Superior Court · October 11, 2024 · in the opinion
Day v. 3M Company Inc. (2024)
…Caterpillar, Inc., Cleaver Brooks, Inc., Eaton Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Gould Pumps, LLC, Graybar Electric Company, Inc., Morse TEC LLC f/k/a BorgWarner TEC, LLC as Successor-by-Merger to Borg-Warner Corporation, Sunbeam Products…
-
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…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · October 15, 2021 · in the opinion
Schneider Electric USA, Inc. v. Williams (2021)
…Judge. This matter is on remand from the Kentucky Supreme Court instructing us to reconsider our prior Opinion in light of its recent decision in Sheets v. Ford Motor Company, 626 S.W.3d 594 (Ky…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · June 22, 2015 · in the opinion
Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)
…("Consolidated Aluminum") (id. ¶ 6); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued both individually, and, as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana") (id. ¶ 7); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford") (id. ¶ 8); and (vii) Unilever United States…