22 results for “Reaction Department”, page 1 of 2
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · August 28, 1996 · in the opinion
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Garrett (1996)
…effect. That OCF had direct knowledge of the hazardous nature of asbestos was evident in 1941, when one of the lawyers in its Legal and Patent Department, having received a letter from a Saranac Doctor, expressed…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 11, 2020 · in the opinion
Olson v. Brenntag N. Am., Inc. (2020)
…present. And Ms. Olson's strong and immediate reaction to hearing about a possible connection between talcum powder and cancer suggests otherwise. The First Department decisions J&J cites are not to the contrary. In Sosna…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · January 21, 1994 · in the opinion
Tabolt v. Flintkote Co. (In re New York Asbestos Litigation, 1994)
Flintkote's argument that this procedure provides a double recovery for inflation was rejected after thorough attention by the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, Fourth Department, in Brown v. State, 184 A.D…
-
Court case · Delaware Superior Court · November 16, 2011 · in the opinion
Gordon v. Dana Companies (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2011)
…because "you didn't just use off-brand parts on that type of equipment. That's something that we as a maintenance department did not — I mean, they didn't want any cut-rate parts."\[10\…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 17, 2017 · in the opinion
Phillips v. Honeywell International Inc. (2017)
…goal of installing brakes weakens the inference that Phillips reaction to a warning on the boxes of Bendix brakes would have been the same as his reaction to the warning on cigarette packaging when he started…
-
Court case · Nebraska Supreme Court · June 1, 2007 · in the opinion
Olivotto v. DeMarco Bros. Co. (2007)
…on October 9, 1998, when she suffered a reaction to latex that required her to seek emergency medical treatment. She had noticed symptoms later associated with an allergy to latex in the 1980's, but the…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · August 31, 2012 · in the opinion
Menssen v. Pneumo Abex Corporation (2012)
…in the report are already known and have been published in other studies on asbestos, no unfavorable reaction need be anticipated. I think the idea of reviewing the manuscript prior to publication is a good one…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · December 7, 2021 · in the opinion
Jones v. Pneumo Abex LLC (2021)
…Id. Therefore, he did not anticipate any unfavorable reaction. Id. He further indicated that he would be unable to attend the meeting at Johns-Manville and requested that Brown represent American Brake Shoe Company in connection…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 29, 2007 · in the opinion
Bakkie v. Union Carbide Corporation (2007)
…You mix them together. That starts the curing. That starts the chemical reaction for it to solidify. And we know that Mr. Bakkie was around the nitrogen gas that topped off the barrels of OPM because…
-
Court case · Minnesota Court of Appeals · September 16, 2019 · in the opinion
Palmer v. Walker Jamar Company (2019)
…district court noted, appellate courts have previously determined legislative amendments as clarifications when there is a "prompt reaction to a court's construction of a statute" with which the legislature disagrees. In Hoben v. City of…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · August 11, 2022 · in the opinion
Walls v. Ford Motor Company (2022)
…In other words, the study found that a person could be exposed to a cumulative annual exposure of up to between 208 and 415 fibers per cubic centimeter before experiencing an observable adverse reaction. (See June…
-
Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · November 15, 1994 · in the opinion
Becker v. Baron Bros. (1994)
…motions, the court stated that its basis for ruling that asbestos products without warnings are defective as a matter of law was "pretty much \ \ \ judicial gut reaction and instinct as well as Beshada." On appeal, the…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · September 26, 2024 · in the opinion
Smargisso v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2024)
…the testimony is not unfairly prejudicial or confusing. Warren is free to cross-examine Orton at trial about his initial reaction when asked about Warren by Warren's counsel, as compared to his later answers when…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · August 28, 1995 · in the opinion
Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1995)
…of cases which involve substantially the same questions of fact, as happens when large numbers of plaintiffs allege that they have developed similar illnesses in reaction to a particular toxic substance. See Fed.R.Civ.P…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio · July 18, 1984 · in the opinion
Laster v. Celotex Corp. (1984)
…ed., 3d ed. 1984) (asbestos "dust particles must be less than 100 micra in size" to be inhaled); Califano, Appendix to Asbestos Law: Victim's Rights and Industry Reaction, 330 Annals N.Y. Acad.Sci. 266…
-
Court case · California Supreme Court · August 18, 1997 · in the opinion
Buttram v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1997)
…or inhalation of asbestos fibers, because many who are exposed will never suffer a compensable injury. Neither would a nondetrimental physiological reaction to asbestos exposure constitute accrual. On the other hand, under this definition a cause…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · March 22, 2013 · in the opinion
Macek v. CBS Corporation (2013)
…Plaintiffs' exhibit 20 is a 1966 study commissioned by UCC revealing that rats had a more "severe reaction" to Calidria asbestos mined by UCC in California as compared to asbestos mined in Canada by Johns Manville…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 29, 2018 · in the opinion
Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2018)
…of the front vehicle in a four-vehicle collision, sued the driver of the rear-most car, Hodes, who had "caus\[ed\] a chain reaction collision" leading to her injury. 363 N.J. Super. at 601…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio · May 11, 2023 · in the opinion
Parker Hannifin Corp. v. Standard Motor Products, Inc. (2023)
…promptly meet and confer to determine what, if any, portions of this Memorandum Opinion & Order warrant redaction. By no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order, the parties shall file a Joint…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 14, 2006 · in the opinion
Quarles v. Advocate Mines Limited (2006)
…something beyond asbestosis, and with asbestosis, you see scarring not seen with the other forms. With the scarring and other complications of asbestos, particularly pleural reactions, come a greater risk of developing cancer. Also, while age…