22 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 2
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 15, 2015 · in the opinion
Soto v. BorgWarner Morse Tec Inc. (2015)
…pain and suffering of the decedent, which is not recoverable as a general rule." The court nonetheless permitted Gabriel to testify about "\[h\]elping out Grandpa towards the end," including giving him morphine, changing his diapers…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 29, 2007 · in the opinion
Bakkie v. Union Carbide Corporation (2007)
…The court explained that the employer was a "sophisticated organization" and it did not have to be "told that gasoline is volatile and that sparks from an electrical connection or friction can cause ignition." (Ibid.) Subsequently…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2024 · in the opinion
Williams v. JM Manufacturing Company, Inc. (2024)
…conclusion about the scope of this duty and explicitly disapproved Campbell. (Kesner, at p. 1156.) "The \general rule' of duty in California is established by statute." (Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc. (2023) 14 Cal.5th 993…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 2, 2017 · in the opinion
Johnson v. ArvinMeritor, Inc. (2017)
…trucks during the relevant time period." (Italics added.) To support this argument, Johnson relies heavily on a footnote in a recent Supreme Court opinion, Webb v. Special Electric Co., Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 167, 193…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 14, 2019
Mettias v. The Pep Boys Manny, Moe & Jack of California (Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2019)
…refusal to give general negligence instructions and the misstatements in reading the instructions caused no prejudicial error. A party is entitled to instructions on every theory supported by substantial evidence, but not to general negligence instructions…
-
Court case · California Supreme Court · December 1, 2016 · in the opinion
Kesner v. Superior Court and Haver (2016)
781.) In general, internalizing the cost of injuries caused by a particular behavior will induce changes in that behavior to make it safer. That consideration may be "outweighed, for a category of negligent conduct, by laws…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2012 · in the opinion
Campbell v. Ford Motor Company (2012)
…or owed only a limited duty, is to be made on a more general basis suitable to the formulation of a legal rule, in most cases preserving for the jury the fact-specific question of whether…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 21, 2014 · in the opinion
Beckering v. Shell Oil Co. (2014)
…and fibers, the third factor addressing the "\closeness of the connection' "between Ford's conduct (hiring a general contractor) and the injury to a worker's family member off the premises was "attenuated." (Id. at p…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · January 10, 2025 · in the opinion
Holste v. 3M Company (2025)
…cv-09814-JLS-E. January 10, 2025. United States District Court, C.D. California. CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL JOSEPHINE L. STATON, District Judge. (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO REMAND (Doc. 34) Before the Court is…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 15, 2007 · in the opinion
Honer v. Ford Motor Company (2007)
…fibers. Honer then breathed these asbestos fibers because of her direct and indirect contact with her father and brother themselves as well as their clothes, vehicles, tools and general surroundings. In July 2004, Honer alleged, she…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 25, 2020 · in the opinion
Textron, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company (2020)
…both parties) to obtain a declaration that Travelers owed a duty to defend and indemnify in the Esters action under a series of Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies issued to Textron by Travelers from January 1…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 5, 2017 · in the opinion
Petitpas v. Ford Motor Company (2017)
…1103.) Even assuming Dr. Horn is correct as to the cause of mesothelioma in general, plaintiffs had the burden to prove that exposure to asbestos-containing materials at Rossmoor was a substantial factor in contributing to…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 24, 2012 · in the opinion
Evans v. Certainteed Corp. (2012)
…Trutanich, City Attorney, Richard M. Brown, General Counsel of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Lisa S. Berger, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendant and Cross-Respondent Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. K…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 30, 2019 · in the opinion
Lopez v. the Hillshire Brands Company (2019)
…430, the more general instruction on substantial-factor causation: "A substantial factor in causing harm is a factor that a reasonable person would consider to have contributed to the harm. It must be more than a…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 14, 2007 · in the opinion
Rosen v. Regents of University of California (2007)
…and premises liability. They sought both general and punitive damages.\[6\] A first amended complaint was filed in May 2002, adding causes of action against the Regents for making false representations and for loss of consortium…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 23, 2023 · in the opinion
Ramirez v. Avon Prods. (Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2023)
…§ 2025.620, italics added.) While discovery in general aids both plaintiffs and defendants equally, the tools of discovery are intended to benefit the party utilizing those tools. The purpose of a deposition is not to aid…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 4, 2012 · in the opinion
Bettencourt v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2012)
…plaintiffs' injuries. I. Standard of Review A motion for judgment on the pleadings is analogous to a general demurrer. (Ludgate, supra, 82 Cal.App.4th at p. 602.) Like a general demurrer, it tests the sufficiency…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 13, 1996 · in the opinion
Hansen v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1996)
…is one of the four plaintiffs in the wrongful death action of Mary Hansen. [\761] (5) "The general rule is that \an appeal reviews the correctness of a judgment as of the time of its rendition…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 2, 2017 · in the opinion
Beckering v. Shell Oil Company (2017)
…an employee of Shell and he performed work under Shell's direct and unfettered control. Beckering further argued that application of the Rowland factors did not support an exception to the general duty of reasonable care…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 19, 2020 · in the opinion
Mata v. Liberty Utilities (park Water) Corp. (2020)
…its employees in the construction and service departments working with asbestos, it is not reasonable to infer from the company's general safety consciousness alone, that it is highly probable that the company was aware of…