11 results for “Owens-Corning Fiberglas”
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 26, 1999 · in the opinion
Howard v. Owens Corning (1999)
…1\] Howard's original personal injury complaint sued respondent Owens Corning under the company's former name of Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation. Throughout this litigation, the parties have referred to Owens Corning under its new name…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 14, 2006 · in the opinion
Quarles v. Advocate Mines Limited (2006)
…person standard. It stresses that negligence, even in a failure-to-warn context, requires proof of the standard of care (Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 994-995, 1001-1004), and…
-
Court case · California Supreme Court · May 15, 2000 · in the opinion
Hamilton v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (2000)
…same\]; Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999) 230 Wis.2d 212, 601 N.W.2d 627, 636 \[same\]; but see Pustejovsky v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp. (Tex.App.1998) 980 S.W.2d 828, 831-833…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 28, 2008 · in the opinion
Garza v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (2008)
…DISCUSSION A. Personal Jurisdiction\[\\\\] B. Arena v. Owens-Corning In Arena v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation (Arena) (1998) 63 Cal. App.4th 1178, 74 Cal.Rptr.2d 580, Division One of this Court upheld a judgment…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 13, 2012 · in the opinion
Shields v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2012)
…strictly liable for failure to warn of risks arising from other manufacturers' products — the court began with the general rule formulated in its decision in Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 21, 2021 · in the opinion
Benavidez v. Fluor Corp. (2021)
…a particular exposure or series of exposures was a \legal cause' of his injury, i.e., a substantial factor in bringing about the injury." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 982-983…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 23, 1994 · in the opinion
Smith v. ACandS, Inc. (1994)
…another contractor working on the premises. On the first point, [\95] Smith's argument against retroactivity has recently been rejected by the Fifth District. (Owens v. Giannetta-Heinrich Construction Co. (1994) 23 Cal. App.4th 1662 \…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2023 · in the opinion
Elorreaga v. Rockwell Automation, Inc. (2023)
…long latency period of asbestos-related disease, and the occupational settings that commonly exposed the worker to multiple forms and brands of asbestos products with varying degrees of toxicity." Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · February 16, 2016 · in the opinion
Walashek v. Air Liquid Systems Corporation (2016)
…medical probability that a particular exposure or series of exposures was a "legal cause" of his injury — i.e., a substantial factor in bringing about the injury. Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 4, 2012 · in the opinion
Bettencourt v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2012)
…context of products liability actions, the plaintiff must prove that the defective products supplied by the defendant were a substantial factor in bringing about his or her injury." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 26, 1998
Gutierrez v. Cassiar Mining Corp. (1998)
…called for much of the monitoring. The trial court refused Cassiar's requested jury instruction saying a defendant owes only for monitoring additional to or different from what those conditions require. The Court of Appeal held…