Legal Opinion

Castorena v. General Electric

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided August 18, 2010No. 35123, 35124, 35852PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURDICK, Justice.

This action, consolidated on appeal, arises out of grants of summary judgment in favor of defendant-respondent corporations (General Electric, et al.; A.W. Chesterton Co., et al.; and FMC Corp., et al.) (collectively, “Respondents”) on the grounds that the plaintiffs-appellants’ (Mildred Castoreña, et al.; Willis E. Norton, Sr.; and John D. Adamson, et al.) (collectively, “Appellants”) wrongful death claims were barred by the condition precedent to Idaho’s wrongful death statute, because the statute of limitations for the decedents’ actions had run prior to their deaths. On…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Justus v. AtchisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Ochoa v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Buckley v. ChadwickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Northern Pacific R. Co. v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  5. Northern Pacific Railway Company v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1904

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

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Spangler v. McQuittyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2016
  2. Martin v. Camas County ex rel. Board of CommissionersIdaho Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Mummert v. AlizadehCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  4. McCann v. McCannIdaho Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Fuller v. DAVE CALLISTERIdaho Supreme Court · 2011

56 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