Legal Opinion
Cossman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 30, 2003No. A097110PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MARCHIANO, P. J.
Plaintiffs Max and Bette Cossman brought an action alleging that Bette Cossman was exposed to asbestos that resulted in a diagnosis of mesothelioma in 1994. Max Cossman appeals from the superior court’s granting of a nonsuit in favor of several Indiana defendants based on the Indiana statute of limitations.
The issue we consider is whether a nonresident plaintiff may bring a tort action in California that accrued in another state and was caused by acts in the other state notwithstanding the fact that the action is barred by the statute of limitations of the foreign…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1997
- Hurtado v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Gennifer Flowers v. James Carville Hillary Rodham Clinton Little, Brown & Co. George StephanopoulosCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Edwards v. Centex Real Estate Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- Biewend v. BiewendCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Lien Huynh v. Chase Manhattan BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Hatfield v. Halifax PLC & HBOS PLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Pga W. Residential Ass'n, Inc. v. Hulven Int'l, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- G and G Productions LLC v. Rita RusicCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Quacchia v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2004
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.