Home > Legal Library > Advanced Search > Search Results

Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected

Search Results (41)

Documents on Toxic Torts, Manufacturing

View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  Next  
Show: results per page
Sort by:
Sponsored Results

HTMLFamily of Former Tire Builder Awarded $18.6 million in Asbestos Lawsuit
DeHay Elliston L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article
November 1, 2014, previously published on October 1, 2014
On September 5, 2014, a Dallas County jury found Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. grossly negligent in the death of former employee, Carl Rogers.


HTMLNew Trial Required Where Asbestos Manufacturer’s Request for Instruction on Employer’s Duty to Employee Not Given
Gregory S. Emrick; Semmes, Bowen & Semmes A Professional Corporation;
Legal Alert/Article
August 19, 2014, previously published on August 2014
Plaintiff’s decedent, Michael Galliher, contracted and died from mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos while employed with Borg Warner (“BW”) at a bathroom fixtures facility. Plaintiff alleged that the materials used at BW were manufactured by the Defendant, R.T....


HTMLOlivet Management Facing $2.3 Million in OSHA Fines For Asbestos Exposure
Katie Nealon; Brayton Purcell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 2, 2014, previously published on April 23, 2014
When fighting in court, many employers will argue that they were not aware of the dangers of asbestos at the time their workers were exposed to the substance. The National Toxicity Program declared asbestos a known human carcinogen in 1987, meaning that, today, no one can deny knowing that asbestos...


HTMLCalifornia's OEHHA Adds New Chemical to Proposition 65 List, Setting up Product Manufacturers/Distributors as Targets to Eager Plaintiffs' Bar
Monica Baumann, David P. Callet, James Mattesich; Greenberg Traurig, LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
January 16, 2014, previously published on January 14, 2014
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announced that it will add diisononyl phthalate (DINP) to the list of chemicals known to the State to cause cancer for purposes of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (widely known as Proposition 65). DINP...


HTMLLead Paint Makers Suffer Landmark Defeat in California Lawsuit
James P. Nevin; Brayton Purcell, LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
January 14, 2014, previously published on January 10, 2014
A state court judge in San Jose, California has ordered lead paint makers to create a $1.1 billion fund to eliminate lead hazards to children in hundreds of thousands of homes in the state.


HTMLIllinois Stops Civil Conspiracy Claims In Asbestos Litigation
Craig T. Liljestrand; Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
December 13, 2013, previously published on November 21, 2013
In Gillenwater v. Honeywell International, et al., 2013 WL 5273355 (Ill.App. 4 Dist.) (Sept. 18, 2013), the Illinois Appellate Court for the Fourth District affirmed the Circuit Court of McLean County, granting Defendant's motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the Plaintiff's...


HTMLThe Sun, the Moon, and the Air: How Much Deference Should a Court Give to Agency Classifications?
Melina S.L. Pinilla; Husch Blackwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
November 25, 2013, previously published on November 6, 2013
Much like its classification of the UV rays from sunshine and “moonshine” (alcoholic beverages), the International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC) has now classified outdoor air as a human carcinogen.


HTMLCalifornia Court of Appeal Holds Intermediary’s Sophistication Not Sufficient, as a Matter of Law, to Avoid Supplier’s Liability for Injury to Product User
Mary Ellen Gambino; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
November 11, 2013, previously published on November 7, 2013
On October 29, 2013, the California Court of Appeal affirmed as proper a trial court’s refusal to give defendant John Crane, Inc.’s (Crane’s) requested jury instruction on the “sophisticated user” defense. In Anne Pfeifer, et al. v. John Crane, Inc., California Court...


HTMLMaryland Court of Appeals Narrows Manufacturer’s Duty to Warn Worker’s Household about Risks of Asbestos-containing Products
Helyna M. Haussler, Sean Higgins, Jason R. Waters; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
July 30, 2013, previously published on July 26, 2013
In Georgia Pacific v. Farrar, No. 102, September Term (MD July 8, 2013), the Maryland Court of Appeals reconsidered a manufacturer’s duty to warn members of a worker’s household about the risks of asbestos-containing products. The court narrowed existing Maryland precedent concerning...


HTMLManufacturer of Asbestos Products Had No Duty to Warn Granddaughter of Danger from Asbestos Dust Carried Into Home on Grandfather’s Clothes
Joel M. Celso; Semmes Bowen Semmes A Professional Corporation;
Legal Alert/Article
July 18, 2013, previously published on July 2013
In this case, Maryland’s Court of Appeals was asked to decide the issue of whether the manufacturer of products containing asbestos owed a duty to family members of individuals who carried asbestos dust home on their clothing to warn of the danger from contact with the dust. The Court of...


View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  Next