Search for: "Asbestos Products Liability v."
Results 21 - 40
of 551
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Oct 2012, 11:53 am
In a Connecticut lawsuit alleging products liability and wrongful death for alleged asbestos exposure, Saldibar, et al v. [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 11:36 am
Co. v. [read post]
7 Mar 2017, 6:52 am
It can be raised by government contractor defendants in certain product liability lawsuits, such as those pertaining to asbestos exposure. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 12:51 pm
CBL, and a lot of our clients in product liability matters, have been closely watching the law develop in California on this question: if a manufacturer's product is not itself defective, but becomes defective when used in conjunction with a third-party's defective products (e.g., the defendant's valves made of steel, but are used with asbestos gaskets and packing made by somebody else), can the manufacturer be held… [read post]
29 May 2017, 12:46 pm
The application of product and premises liability tests is undoubtedly a complex and difficult endeavor for state courts, as there are numerous factors which come into play when a secondary asbestos exposure case is examined. [read post]
7 Nov 2015, 5:46 am
The case, Aubin v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 1:37 pm
Saller v. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 7:24 pm
As a Missouri product liability attorney, I was interested to see a rare Supreme Court ruling in a product liability case. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 7:16 am
” This ruling provided an additional viable defense for defendants in product liability lawsuits, such as those filed against makers and distributors of products that contained toxic asbestos. [read post]
29 Jun 2013, 5:41 am
The trial court jury in Webb v. [read post]
30 Sep 2012, 4:49 pm
A-C Product Liability Trust (6th Cir. 2005) 424 F.3d 488; Ford Motor Co. v. [read post]
19 Jun 2012, 12:00 pm
" Betz v. [read post]
18 Feb 2015, 1:24 pm
In Barraford v. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 12:25 pm
In this case, a lower court had ruled that in order to demonstrate causation in product liability lawsuits, plaintiffs had to show not just that products containing asbestos were used on the job site, but also that the worker had inhaled asbestos dust from defendant’s product. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 12:25 pm
In this case, a lower court had ruled that in order to demonstrate causation in product liability lawsuits, plaintiffs had to show not just that products containing asbestos were used on the job site, but also that the worker had inhaled asbestos dust from defendant’s product. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 4:30 am
Whether or not the plaintiff had established these three elements was the issue in Morin v. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 6:54 am
In other words, the fact that the defendants did not supply the asbestos-containing replacement parts did not shield them from liability. [read post]
26 Nov 2012, 1:47 pm
Judge Eduardo Robreno, the judge who oversees the multidistrict maritime asbestos litigation in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (MDL 875), recently held a ship is not a product and, therefore, not subject to liability under traditional product liability and strict liability principles. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 1:50 pm
STANDARD, INC., last week, holding that a sophisticated user defense applies to product liability actions. [read post]
24 Jun 2019, 7:40 am
Delayed Diagnosis and Product Liability in Massachusetts When it comes to filing a delayed product liability claim in Massachusetts, our product liability lawyers know controlling case law includes Evans v. [read post]
