Search for: "Ford v. General Accident"
Results 121 - 140
of 203
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Dec 2011, 1:33 pm
Ford Motor Co., 389 S.C. 434, 452-53, 699 S.E.2d 169, 179 (2010) ("We also note that Respondents may not rely solely on the fact that an accident occurred to prove their products liability case under a negligence theory since South Carolina does not follow the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 9:53 pm
DISCUSSION Absent a waiver, governmental entities are generally immune from suits for damages. [read post]
11 Dec 2011, 1:02 pm
In the 2009 decision in Abad v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 6:02 pm
That was put to the test in the Mississippi Supreme Court's ruling in Double Quick Inc. v. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 8:25 pm
In that case, Ford Motor Company decided to ignore a design flaw that caused Ford Pintos to catch fire when involved in accidents. [read post]
26 Oct 2011, 8:18 pm
Britny V. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 3:00 am
Rodriguez then fled the scene of the accident on foot. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 6:42 pm
GRIMSLEY, Appellant, v. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 4:26 am
See, e.g., Kotler v. [read post]
30 Sep 2011, 4:21 am
Plaintiffs were involved in a motor vehicle accident in a 1993 Ford Explorer; they sued Ford, alleging design defect. [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 3:16 pm
General Motors, 391 F. 2d 495 (8th Cir. 1968)). [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 8:27 am
I did numerous blog entries earlier this year about my involvment in South Carolina's debate and passage of tort reform in the General Assembly. [read post]
21 Jul 2011, 7:51 am
The general rules of contract interpretation were applied by Louisiana's Second Circuit Court of Appeal in the case of Kottenbrook v. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 3:10 pm
At trial, Ford sought to introduce evidence as to the cause of the initial accident, which was that another minor was intoxicated and negligently drove the vehicle into the tree. [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 3:00 am
A general principle prevalent in both the common law preceding the enactment of the GTLA and in the Act itself is that governmental entities are generally immune from liability for any injury resulting from the exercise of governmental or proprietary functions. [read post]
10 May 2011, 3:46 pm
Why it’s important: Green is the latest in a line of cases [See also Ford Motor Co. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2011, 3:31 am
Burchfield v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 10:00 pm
In Palmer v Durnford Ford, [1992] QB 483, the High Court held that an expert witness was not immune from suit in respect of work done primarily for the purpose of advising the client. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 7:44 pm
Green v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 8:28 am
Ford Motor Co., 10-668). [read post]
