14 results for “Owens-Illinois”
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · August 29, 1990
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Balbos (1990)
The Court of Special Appeals reversed the punitive damages awards for the Knuckles estate against Eagle-Picher and Owens-Illinois and affirmed all other judgments for the plaintiffs against the manufacturer and installer defendants. A jury…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · February 1, 2010
Crane v. Linkus (2010)
George Linkus, a Baltimore shipyard machinist, was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma in 2005 and sued John Crane, Inc. and others. He had worked at the Key Highway shipyard from 1952 to 1959, overhauling valves and packing them with dry, powdery…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · April 10, 1992
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Balbos (1992)
…and it ordered a new trial on punitive damages against Owens-Illinois and Eagle-Picher. A nonmanufacturing supplier-installer of asbestos is held to a 'should have known' standard in a negligent failure-to-warn claim…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · July 25, 2016 · in the opinion
Arbogast v. AW Chesterton Co. (2016)
…cause of the injuries, and (4) that the product was expected to and did reach the consumer without substantial change in its condition." Phipps, 363 A.2d at 958, quoted in Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · September 26, 2012 · in the opinion
Georgia-Pacific v. Farrar (2012)
…now to discuss the impact of Adams, Dehn, Pharmacia and Gourdine on a manufacturer's duty to warn in an asbestos case. Georgia-Pacific first cites Adams v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 119 Md. App. 395 (1998)…
-
Court case · Maryland Appellate Court · February 8, 2024 · in the opinion
Basil-Flippen v. General Electric Company (2024)
…dust." Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Garrett, 343 Md. 500, 506 (1996); see also id. at 506 n.2 (describing the medical field's study of mesothelioma and conclusions about its relation to asbestos); Owens-Illinois…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · October 11, 1996 · in the opinion
ACandS Inc. v. Asner (1996)
…s conclusions, namely that the evidence relating to TLVs offered by the petitioners was properly excluded and that the evidence offered in support of punitive damages was sufficient under the test enunciated in Owens-Illinois, Inc…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · April 27, 1995 · in the opinion
ACandS, Inc. v. Asner (1995)
…all of the other companies settled, became bankrupt, or were dismissed from the case. AC & S was dismissed from the Payne action. Appellants cross-claimed for contribution against Owens-Illinois, Inc., GAF, Inc., Pittsburgh Corning Corporation…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · May 31, 2016 · in the opinion
Stein v. Pfizer Inc. (2016)
…BALTIMORE CITY AFFIRMED. COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLANTS. \[1\] The complaint named the following entities as defendants: Union Carbide Corporation; John Crane-Houdaille, Inc.; Owens-Illinois Glass Company; General Refractories Company; Koppers Company, Inc.; Universal…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 27, 2017 · in the opinion
Hiett v. Ac&r Insulation Co., Inc. (2017)
…the Court of Appeals referenced this Court's decision in Adams v. Owens-Illinois, stating that our decision applied "the same policy of avoiding expansive new duties to hold that an employer owed no duty to…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · February 27, 2014 · in the opinion
Citrano v. John Crane-Houdaille, Inc. (2014)
…between \[plaintiff\], GE, and the U.S. Navy Vessels allegedly a part of the asbestos exposure"); Covington v. Owens Illinois Glass Co., CIV.A. GLR-12-461, 2012 WL 4764883, at [\1]-[\2] (D.Md. Oct…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · August 10, 2018 · in the opinion
Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Busch (2018)
…is what the Court of Appeals has "termed a \bystander,' in that he did not work directly with the asbestos products but was in the vicinity of where such products were used." Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · September 26, 2018 · in the opinion
Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Busch (2018)
…is what the Court of Appeals has "termed a \bystander,' in that he did not work directly with the asbestos products but was in the vicinity of where such products were used." Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · July 3, 2019 · in the opinion
Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Busch (2019)
…permissible to inform a jury that a co-defendant to the asbestos lawsuit had been dismissed when a remaining defendant "opens the door" by introducing evidence relating to the earlier presence of that now-dismissed party…