11 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · May 2, 2016 · in the opinion
Whelan v. Armstrong Int'l (2016)
…Inc.; Fortune Brands Home & Security Inc., individually, d/b/a and as successor to Moen Inc.; Foster Wheeler LLC; General Electric Co.; Georgia-Pacific LLC; the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; Goulds Pumps Inc.; Graco Inc.; Grundfos…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · May 16, 2018 · in the opinion
Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2018)
…INTERNATIONAL INC.; FORTUNE BRANDS HOME & SECURITY INC., individually, d/b/a and as successor to Moen Inc.; FOSTER WHEELER LLC; GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.; GEORGIA-PACIFIC LLC; THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO.; GOULDS PUMPS INC.; GRACO INC…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · December 19, 2016 · in the opinion
Vesper v. 3M Company (2016)
…MATTHEW P. KESSLER, MCGIVNEY & KLUGER PC. FOSTER WHEELER, LLC, Defendant, represented by CHRISTOPHER J. KEALE, SEDGWICK LLP. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant, represented by CHRISTOPHER J. KEALE, SEDGWICK LLP & DAVID SCHUYLER BLOW, SEDGWICK LLP. GEORGIA-PACIFIC, LLC…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court · March 8, 1985 · in the opinion
Devlin v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1985)
… 26, provides that the general rules against claim splitting are rendered inapplicable when: (b) The court in the first action has expressly reserved the plaintiff's right to maintain the second action or; (f) it is…
-
Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 19, 1982 · in the opinion
Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982)
…Rather, defendants state, the cost "will be borne by the public at large and reflected in a general, across the board increase in premiums to compensate for unanticipated risks." There is some truth in this assertion…
-
Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · July 26, 1993 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Keene Corp. (1993)
…there is no common experience on which we can premise the creation of a presumption that the general public reads and heeds warnings. [\597] We can agree with defendant that the heeding presumption is not firmly…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 22, 1994 · in the opinion
Goss v. American Cyanamid Co. (1994)
…as a salesperson to the American Cyanamid plant that there should be an inference raised that he sold them asbestos containing products inasmuch as they were available to customers of Madsen & Howell in a general sense…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · April 27, 1990 · in the opinion
Jenkins v. Johns-Manville Products (1990)
…BROCHIN. Lawrence G. Moncher, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent-appellant Commissioner Of Labor, and respondent-cross-appellant in A-5659-86T7 (Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Lawrence G…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · July 22, 1988 · in the opinion
Millison v. EI du Pont de Nemours (1988)
…Ed. 610, 617 (1939); U.S. v. Trotter, 529, F.2d 806 (3d Cir.1976); State v. General Restoration Co., 42 N.J. 366, 375 (1964); State v. Sherwin, 127 N.J. Super. 370 (App.Div…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 5, 1995 · in the opinion
Ripa v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995)
…insufficient showing of notice of the many Saranac documents which the jury was led to believe were known to Owens-Corning which still marketed Kaylo with no warnings to the end users. As a general rule…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 22, 1989 · in the opinion
Sholtis v. American Cyanamid Co. (1989)
…theory of non-identification liability is acceptable in New Jersey. \[9\] The court "reserve\[d\] decision on the general appropriateness of including products with different degrees of risk in a market-share analysis." 116 N.J…