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 “Signal International, Inc.”
David v. Signal International, LLCpublic domain
ORDER AND REASONS SUSIE MORGAN, District Judge. Before the Court is a Motion to Certify for Interlocutory Appeal or Alternatively to Stay Pending Application for Mandamus Relief filed by Defendants Signal International, L.L.C., Signal International, Inc., and Signal International Texas, G.P. (collectively “Signal”).1 Defendants Malvern Burnett, the Law Offices of Malve
David v. Signal International, LLCpublic domain
ORDER AND REASONS DANIEL E. KNOWLES, III, United States Magistrate Judge. The undersigned Magistrate Judge conducted a telephone hearing regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion for Protective Order Precluding Inquiries with an In Terrorem Effect (Doc. # 315) and Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (Doc. # 319). Participating on behalf of plaintiffs were Alan Bruce Howard, Daniel Werner and Robert P. Wynne. Partici
David v. Signal International, L.L.C.public domain
735 F.Supp.2d 440 (2010) Kurian DAVID, et al. v. SIGNAL INTERNATIONAL, L.L.C., et al. Civil Action No. 08-1220. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. August 26, 2010. Alan Bruce Howard, Hugh Daniel Sandler, Dewey & Leboeuf LLP, Chandra S. Bhatnagar, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (New York/Broad), Ivy O. Suriyopas, Sameer Ahmed, Tushar J. Shet
The Florida International University Board of Trustees v. Signal Safe, Inc., a Florida Corporationpublic domain
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 22, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D22-2123 Lower Tribunal No. 17-29075 ________________ The Florida International University Board of Trustees, Appellant/Cross
Wannall v. Honeywell International, Inc.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. This is a products liability case involving allegations that the defendant’s automobile brakes, containing ehrysotile asbestos fibers, caused the decedent’s lung cancer.1 This ease is set for trial on May 20, 2013, and among the thirty pre-trial motions filed is a motion to reconsider the denial of the defendant’s motio
Lawson v. Honeywell International, Inc.public domain
WALLER, Chief Justice, for the Court: ¶ 1. Plaintiff Pamela Lynn Lawson appeals the trial court’s grants of summary judgment to the defendant, Honeywell International, Inc., on Lawson’s Mississippi Products Liability Act (“MPLA”) claim and her negligence claim arising from injuries Lawson sustained when her seatbelt buckle allegedly malfunctioned during an automobile accident. We affirm the trial court’s g
Darbonne v. Allied Signal, Inc.public domain
|, WOOD ARP, Judge. Honeywell appeals an interlocutory judgment, denying its motion to transfer venue from the 14th JDC for Calcasieu Parish to the 19th JDC for East Baton Rouge Parish. We reverse the trial court’s decision, remand the case, and order that it be transferred to the 19th JDC. * * * On June 15, 1998, a helicopter lost power while transporting Mr. Todd Darbonne and Mr. Shannon Boudreaux from an
Weible v. Allied Signal, Inc.public domain
963 A.2d 521 (2008) Sara Jane WEIBLE, Executrix of The Estate of William Weible, and in her own right, Appellant v. ALLIED SIGNAL, INC., Amchem Products, Inc., American Standard, A.O. Smith Corp., Asbestos Corp., Ltd., Asten Group, Inc., A.W. Chesterton Inc., Bell Asbestos Mines, Inc., Benjamin Foster, Co., Bondex International, Inc., Brand Insulations, Inc., Broudy *522 Supply Co., Certainteed Corp., Inc., Cr
Allied Signal Recovery Trust v. Allied Signal Inc.public domain
OPINION OF THE COURT ROTH, Circuit Judge. We have before us a procedural muddle. The District Court has ordered a ease remanded to state court in Delaware even though the case was removed from a state court in Florida. The parties agree that a case cannot be remanded to a state court that is a stranger to the case. They disagree, however, about the extent of our appellate jurisdiction and the remedy we sho
Allied Signal Recovery Trust v. Allied Signal Inc.public domain
298 F.3d 263 *ALLIED SIGNAL RECOVERY TRUST, Appellant/Petitioner,v.ALLIED SIGNAL INC., Honeywell International Inc., f/k/a Allied Signal Inc., Appellant. *(Amended — See Court's Order dated 5/16/01) No. 01-1111. No. 01-1355. No. 01-1139. United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit. Argued December 7, 2001.</
Henderson v. Allied Signal, Inc.public domain
373 S.C. 179 (2007) 644 S.E.2d 724 James W. HENDERSON, Jr., and Betty Lee Henderson, Appellants, v. ALLIED SIGNAL, INC. (Successor to The Bendix Corp.), Aqua-Chem, Inc., (d/b/a Cleaver-Brooks Division), Certain-Teed Corporation, Combustion Engineering, Inc., Daimler Chrysler, Ford Motor Company, Freightliner, General Motors Corporation, International Truck & Engine Corporation (formerly Navistar International Transport
Holmes v. Telecheck International, Inc.public domain
(2008) Patricia HOLMES v. TELECHECK INTERNATIONAL, INC. and Telecheck Services, Inc. No. 3:05-0633. United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division. January 10, 2008. MEMORANDUM TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Pending before the Court are the parties' renewed cross-motions for summary judgment (Docket Nos. 329 and 349) to w
Flight International, Inc. v. Allied Signal, Inc., Allied Signal, Inc., a Delaware Corporationpublic domain
59 F.3d 175NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee,v.ALLIED SIGNAL, INC., Allied Signal, Inc., a Delawarecorporation, Defendant-Appellant. No.
Frazier v. Honeywell International, Inc.public domain
518 F.Supp.2d 831 (2007) Carol Wayne FRAZIER and Tonya R. Frazier, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Lauren M. Frazier, Deceased, Plaintiffs v. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC., f/k/a Allied-Signal, Inc., Defendant. No. 2-05CV548. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Marshall Division. October 3, 2007. *832
Honeywell International, Inc. v. Parsonspublic domain
PER CURIAM. Upon review of the record, we cannot conclude that there was reversible error or an abuse of trial court discretion. We have considered the cases cited by Appellants, but deem them distinguishable. Therefore, the non-final order is affirmed. STONE, SHAHOOD and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Fulk v. Allied Signal, Inc.public domain
*1201OPINION MATTINGLY-MAY, Judge. Helen Fulk, as widow of Bert Fulk and executrix of his estate, appeals the Lake County Superior Court's grant of summary judgment for multiple defendants in her action for loss of consortium and the wrongful death of her husband.1 Fulk raises three issues on appeal
Lowery v. Honeywell International, Inc.public domain
Hanna Steel Corporation; Allied Signal, Inc.; Bailey PVS Oxides; Certainteed Corporation; Fritz Enterprises, Inc.; Honeywell International, Inc.; United States Steel Corporation; Vulcan Materials Company; and W.J. Bullock, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "the businesses"), defendants in an environmental-trespass action filed in the Bessemer Division of the Jefferson Circuit Court, petition *Page 807 for a writ of mandamus challenging the trial co
Windsor Green Owners Ass'n v. Allied Signal, Inc.public domain
362 S.C. 12 (2004) 605 S.E.2d 750 WINDSOR GREEN OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Respondent, v. ALLIED SIGNAL, INC., Honeywell International, Inc., and Stanley V. Kaminski, Defendants, of whom Allied Signal, Inc. and Honeywell International, Inc. are, Appellants. No. 3884. Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard October 12, 2004. Decided Nove
David v. Signal International, LLCpublic domain
ORDER AND REASONS SUSIE MORGAN, District Judge. Before the Court is a Motion for Entry of Discovery Plan and Case Management Order filed by plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”)-1 Defendant Signal International, LLC (“Signal”) opposes the EEOC’s motion.2 Plaintiffs-Intervenors filed a response in support of the EEOC’s Propo
EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge: Honeywell International, Inc. (“Honeywell”) appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in its suit against Phillips Petroleum Company (“Phillips”). The issue on appeal is whether the court erred in holding that Phillips had no contractual duty to indemnify Honeywell for costs and attorney’s fees Honeywell incurred defending a sui