Legal Opinion

Reed v. Armstrong Cork Co.

District Court, E.D. Arkansas

Decided October 28, 1983No. LR-C-79-477PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

GEORGE HOWARD, Jr., District Judge.

Pending before this Court are plaintiff’s motions for partial summary judgment against Pittsburg Corning Corporation (PCC) and Nicolet, Inc. Plaintiff asks this Court to decide as a matter of law that PCC is the successor corporation of UN AR-CO, that Nicolet is the successor corporation of Keasbey & Mattison (K & M), and that as successor corporations, PCC and Nicolet are liable for any damages caused to plaintiff by his exposure to the various asbestos-containing products of their predecessors, UNARCO and K & M. Both PCC and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Amader v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Hall v. Armstrong Cork, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Kaminski v. Western MacArthur Co.California Court of Appeal · 1985
  3. Savage Arms, Inc. v. Western Auto Supply Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Winsor v. Glasswerks PHX, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2003
  5. Campbell v. Davol, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2010

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API