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

Search

43 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 3

  1. 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…

  2. 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;…

  3. 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…

  4. 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…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 25, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …have also joined and adopted these various motions, including American Insurance Company, International Paper Company, Uniroyal Holding, Inc., Pneumo Abex, LLC, BMW of North America, LLC, Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Ford Motor Company, gulf Engineering…

  6. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · May 22, 1996 · in the opinion

    Egan v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. (1996)

    …is to apply the law of the state with the most significant contacts. Lee v. Ford Motor Company, supra. \ \ \ \ \ \ \[If\] a true conflict exists, the second step is to determine which state has the most significant…

  7. Court case · New York Supreme Court · February 6, 2015 · in the opinion

    Erickson v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2015)

    …order granting defendant Koppers Company, a contractor, summary judgment pursuant to Michigan's statute of repose.\[12\] Plaintiff Pendzsu worked as a truck driver delivering materials to buildings owned by Ford Motor Company and Great Lakes…

  8. 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…

  9. Court case · Oregon Court of Appeals · March 31, 2005 · in the opinion

    West v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2005)

    …Chrysler Corporation; Ferodo America, Inc., a Delaware corporation, individually and as successor-in-interest to Nuturn Corporation; Ford Motor Company, a Delaware corporation; General Motors, a Delaware corporation; G.I. Joe's, an Oregon corporation; Metalclad…

  10. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · September 29, 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…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · November 5, 1997 · in the opinion

    Ciletti v. Raymark Indus. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 1997)

    …and a reasonable person would conclude that the utility of the product did not outweigh the risk inherent in marketing a product designed in that manner." Denny v. Ford Motor Company, 87 N.Y.2d 248…

  12. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · October 14, 2009 · in the opinion

    Nye v. Bayer Cropscience, Inc. (2009)

    …its employees of the dangerous nature of the product was the proximate cause of the accident." Whitehead, 775 S. W. 2d 593, 599 — 600 (citing Ford Motor Company v. Wagoner, 183 Tenn. 392, 192 S.W…

  13. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 8, 2018 · in the opinion

    Foglia v. Moore Dry Dock Company (2018)

    …transmission." (Id. at p. 1140; followed by Petitpas v. Ford Motor Co. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 261, 275-276.) The court limited the duty to "members of a worker's household, i.e., persons who…

  14. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · January 27, 2009 · in the opinion

    Martin v. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company (2009)

    …II. ANALYSIS A. Standard of Review As this is a diversity action, Kentucky substantive law applies. Gahafer v. Ford Motor Co., 328 F.3d 859, 861 (6th Cir. 2003). Procedurally, federal standards for summary judgment govern…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 10, 1985 · in the opinion

    Kaminski v. Western MacArthur Co. (1985)

    …v. IRM Corporation (1985) 38 Cal.3d 454 \[213 Cal. Rptr. 213, 698 P.2d 116\]; Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964) 61 Cal.2d 256 \[37 Cal. Rptr. 896, 391 P.2d 168\]; Barth v…

  16. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 1, 1988 · in the opinion

    H & H Plumbing Co. v. Indus. Comm'n (1988)

    …(1976), 39 Ill. App.3d 59, 65-66, 349 N.E.2d 616, 621; see Pearson v. Ford Motor Co. (1975), 32 Ill. App.3d 188, 191, 336 N.E. 2d 528, 530.) In the case…

  17. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · July 11, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. (2014)

    …1965). \[44\] RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL HARM § 26 (2010). \[45\] See id. § 26 cmt. j. \[46\] 232 S.W.3d at 772. \[47\] Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer, 285 Va. 141…

  18. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · September 5, 2013 · in the opinion

    Nelson v. Airco Welders Supply (2013)

    …ENGINEERING, FORD MOTOR CO., FOSECO, INC., FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION, GARLOCK, INC., GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, GENERAL MOTORS CORP., GEORGE V. HAMILTON, INC., GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION, GOULD PUMPS, INC., GREEN, TWEED & COMAPNY, INC., HAJOCA PLUMBING SUPPLY COMPANY, HARNISCHFEGER…

  19. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · January 21, 1985 · in the opinion

    Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)

    …Inc., 656 F.2d 1147, 1153 (5th Cir.1981); King v. Ford Motor Co., 597 F.2d 436, 445 (5th Cir.1979). We find no abuse of discretion on the part of the district court. Nothing…

  20. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · March 23, 1984 · in the opinion

    Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)

    …protection to a rigidly literal class of "users and consumers." In Ford Motor Co. v. Cockrell, 211 So.2d 833 (Miss.1968), a city employee noticed smoke rising from the motor of an unattended city truck…