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

Search

6 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · July 16, 1991 · in the opinion

    Fibreboard Corp. v. Pool (1991)

    …1969). Quantifying probability, it means a more than fifty percent chance. See Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Underwriters v. Gary Douglas Electric, 48 Ohio App.2d 319, 357 N.E.2d 388, 392 (1974). Dr. J.D. Britton…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas · March 31, 2021

    LaFRENTZ v. Lockheed Martin Corporation (2021)

    The court denied 3M and General Dynamics' request for an adverse inference jury instruction for spoliation, but granted a lesser remedy: a limited jury instruction describing the unanswered preservation request and the burial of the lung…

  3. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · July 14, 1998 · in the opinion

    In re Ethyl Corp. (1998)

    …184, 133 L.Ed.2d 122 (1995); see also Friendly, Federal Jurisdiction: A General View 120 (1973) (condemning "blackmail settlements"), quoted in In re Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Inc., 51 F.3d at 1298. On the other…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · November 12, 1990 · in the opinion

    Cimino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1990)

    …to concurrently produce a single injury, the plaintiff may recover from the defendant for the entire injury. Shipp v. General Motors Corporation, 750 F.2d 418, 425-26 (5th Cir.1985). The plaintiff need only show…

  5. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · March 9, 2006 · in the opinion

    Mobil Oil Corp. v. Bailey (2006)

    …972 S.W.2d at 728). Helton, 133 S.W.3d at 254. Toxic tort cases usually require proof of both "general" and "specific" causation with regard to the effects of the toxic substance. Frias v…

  6. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · January 22, 2015 · in the opinion

    In re EI DU Pont DE Nemours and Company (2015)

    …a preponderance of the evidence or even affirmative evidence, because to require such would incorrectly shift the burden of proof. Clophus v. General Motors Corp., 769 S.W.2d 669, 670 (Tex. App.-Houston \[14th Dist.…