Legal Opinion

Amader v. Johns-Manville Corp.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 1, 1982No. Civ. A. 79-4546PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

TROUTMAN, District Judge.

Moving for partial summary judgment based upon offensive collateral estoppel, plaintiff asserts that prior jury findings that defendant, Pittsburgh-Corning’s high temperature insulation product, “Unibestos”, was defective when manufactured between 1962 and 1968 forecloses relitigation of that issue. Plaintiff also seeks to invoke collateral estoppel to prevent relitigation whether “Unibestos” was a substantial factor in producing the asbestos-related diseases from which he purportedly suffers. Recognizing the beneficial and salutory effects of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Clarence Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Nationalsurety Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
  4. Safeguard Mutual Insurance v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. John A. Karjala v. Johns-Manville Products CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Amader v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. ACandS, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API