Search for: "In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation" Results 1 - 12 of 12
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Jul 2013, 1:28 pm by WIMS
The jury found Exxon liable under New York tort law for contaminating City-owned wells in Queens by its release of the chemical methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), which Exxon used as a gasoline additive from the mid-1980s through the mid-2000s, and whose use New York State banned as of 2004. [read post]
24 May 2007, 2:37 pm
  In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litig., No. 04-5974-cv (2d Cir. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 11:41 pm
Exxon Mobil Corp., 04-cv- 3417, grouped with others in the master-file case, In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation, 00-cv-1898, U.S. [read post]
1 Sep 2021, 10:09 am by Rebecca Tushnet
In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (“MTBE”) Products Liability Litig., 2021 WL 3371938, No. 1:00-1898, MDL 1358, No. 14 Civ. 6228 (VSB) (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
6 Jul 2008, 10:32 am
See In re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Products Liability Litigation, case number 1:00-cv-01898. [read post]
20 Aug 2009, 2:30 am
Sept. 6, 2001) (granting in part and denying in part motion to dismiss master complaint); In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation, 175 F. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 1:00 pm by William A. Ruskin
In the toxic tort context, across the Hudson River from New Jersey, New York litigants look to In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (“MTBE”) Products Liability Litigation, 379 F. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 8:07 am by Bexis
We're talking about the Restatement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability §2, to be precise. [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 1:04 pm by Eric
* In re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) Products Liability Litigation, 2010 WL 3720406 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
31 May 2007, 4:31 am
Goetzmann, 315 F.3d 457, 460 (5th Cir. 2002); In re Orthopedic Bone Screw Products Liability Litigation, 193 F.3d 781, 794 (3d Cir. 1999); Prohias v. [read post]