Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “MURPHY v. UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION”
Union Carbide Corp. v. Martinpublic domain
349 S.W.3d 137 (2011) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Bob K. MARTIN, Appellee. No. 05-09-01052-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas. July 13, 2011. *139 Kevin Michael Jordan, Macey Reasoner Stokes, Amy Pharr Hefley, Baker Botts L.L.P., Stephen G. Tipps, Houston, for Appellant. Gregory Neill Jones, Boyar Miller, D
Lee Sommerville v. Union Carbide Corporationpublic domain
USCA4 Appeal: 24-1491 Doc: 60 Filed: 08/18/2025 Pg: 1 of 41 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-1491 LEE ANN SOMMERVILLE, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff – Appellant,
Benjamin v. Union Carbide Corp.public domain
873 A.2d 463 (2005) 162 Md. App. 173 Elsie L. BENJAMIN, Individually, etc. v. UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, et al. No. 959, September Term, 2004. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. May 3, 2005. *466 Timothy J. Hogan, Baltimore, for Appellant. Laura A. Cellucci and Philip A. Kulinski (Steven J. Parro
Union Carbide Corp. v. Tarancon Corp.public domain
742 F.Supp. 1565 (1990) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. TARANCON CORPORATION and Gregorio Tarancon, Defendants. No. 1:86-CV-1811-RHH. United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division. April 30, 1990. *1566 John T. Marshall, David Ross, Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff. <
Union Carbide Corp. v. Tarancon Corp.public domain
682 F.Supp. 535 (1988) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. TARANCON CORPORATION and Gregorio Tarancon, Defendants. No. 1:86-CV-1811-RHH. United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division. March 23, 1988. *536 Carol Ann Eller, John Treutlen Marshall, Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Atlanta, Ga., Peter DeLuc
MPM Silicones, LLC v. Union Carbide Corp.public domain
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER LAWRENCE E. KAHN, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff MPM Silicones, LLC (“Plaintiff’ or “MPM”), commenced this action on December 30, 2011, by filing a Complaint against Defendant Union Carbide Corporation (“Defendant” or “Union Carbide”) seeking to recover the costs Plaintiff incurred in identifying and responding to Defendant’s release
In Re Union Carbide Corp.public domain
Case Number: 14-04-00538-CV 03/30/2006 Case stored in record room 03/24/2006 Petition for Writ of Mandamus disposed Dismissed 03/24/2006 Motion to dismiss disposed Granted 03/24/2006 Motion to supplement disposed Filing dismissed as moot 03/02/2006 Status report requested in underlying litigation filed 12/15/2005 Status report requested in underlying litigation filed 11/15/2005 Electronic copies of brief posted to website 11/15/2005 Electronic copies of brief posted to website 11/15/2005 Elec
Elmo McDonald v. Union Carbide Corporation v. Allied Chemical Co., Gte Sylvania Co. And Convent Chemical Co.public domain
PER CURIAM: Five separate diversity actions were filed against American Cyanamid Company, along with 29 other suppliers of materials, for personal injuries the plaintiffs allegedly sustained while working for American Cyanamid in Fort Worth, Texas. The cases were consolidated for discovery and pre-trial. Following a significant amoun
Lightfoot v. Union Carbide Corp.public domain
McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff appeals from an order entered May 12, 1994 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Patterson, J.) granting summary judgment to defendants, dismissing all but one of plaintiffs claims. .Defendants cross-appeal, attacking the verdict as against the weight of the evidence and the entire trial as fundamentally unfair. BACKGROUND
Petitions for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Opinion filed September 23, 2004 Petitions for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Opinion filed September 23, 2004. In The
128 P.3d 319 (2005) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION and American Motorists Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS OFFICE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO; Subsequent Injury Fund; and Dorothy W. Spencer, Respondents. No. 05CA0081. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I. December 1, 2005. *320 White & Steele, PC, Ted A. Krumr
782 F.2d 710 54 USLW 2423, 1986-1 Trade Cases 66,940,4 Fed.R.Serv.3d 151 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Petitioner,v.U.S. CUTTING SERVICE, INC., et al., Respondents.In re INDUSTRIAL GAS ANTITRUST LITIGATION.Appeal of UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION.UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, Petitioner,v.The Honorable Susan GETZENDANNER, Respondent. Nos. 85-2926, 85-2965 and 85-3039.
Cockrum v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc.public domain
FILE THIS OPINION WAS FILED FOR RECORD AT 8 A.M. ON MAY 29, 2025 IN CLERK’S OFFICE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WASHINGTON SARAH R. PENDLETON MAY 29, 2025
Hager v. Union Carbide Corp.public domain
—Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Kenneth Shorter, J.), entered March 28, 1984 dismissing the complaint, is affirmed, without costs. Special Term properly concluded on this record that none of the five causes of action alleged in the complaint is cognizable. The dissent, relying upon excerpted language from Weiner v McGraw-Hill, Inc. (57 NY2d 458), would sustain the first cause of action, which, after setting forth cer
Mildred Wadley v. Mother Murphy's Laboratories, Inc.public domain
FOURTH DIVISION DILLARD, P. J., RICKMAN and BROWN, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules October 21,
Hernandez v. Union Carbide Corp.public domain
642 F.Supp. 1000 (1986) Julio Fernandez HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff, v. UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, J.G. McFerrin, and/or R. Hardison, and/or B. Barton, and/or R. Hanlon, Defendants. Civ. No. 83-2926 (JAF). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. August 28, 1986. Pedro J. Varela, Hato Rey, P.R., for plaintiff. Manuel A. Guzmán, McConnell Valdes Kelley Sifre Gri
Kivell v. Murphy Oil USA Inc.public domain
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE: ASBESTOS LITIGATION SANDRA KIVELL, individually and as ) Personal Representative of the Estate of ) MILTON J. KIVELL, deceased, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) C.A. No. N15C-07-093 ASB v. ) ) MURPHY OIL USA INC. et
Pinnacle Roofs Plus v. William Murphypublic domain
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 25, 2015 Session PINNACLE ROOFS PLUS V. WILLIAM MURPHY Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 13C3518 Joseph P. Binkley, Jr., Judge No. M2014-01286-COA-R3-CV – Filed April 30, 2015 Roofing company filed a civil warrant against homeowner for money owed o
Parks v. Union Carbide Corp.public domain
WELLIVER, Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. The principal opinion would set in concrete two exceptions to the rule announced in Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Whitehead and Kales Co., 566 S.W.2d 466 (Mo. banc 1978), that two concurrent tortfeasors should bear the damages caused to the plaintiff in proportion to their relative fault. The principal opinion approves the ex