Ackler v. Raymark Industries, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that summary judgment was appropriate because employee’s complaint against employer to recover for asbestos-related injuries was filed more than two years after employee signed workers' compensation under oath which stated that employee had asbestosis
• holding an affidavit, which contradicts prior testimony, is so inherently incredible that it should be disregarded in opposition to the entry of summary judgment
• holding an affidavit, which contradicts prior testimony, is so inherently incredible that it should be disregarded in opposition to the entry of summary judgment
• stating that “it is not necessary that the exact nature of his injury be known so long as it objectively appears that he is reasonably charged with the knowledge that he has an injury caused by another”
• demonstrating that petition alleged “in detail the nature of his illness as asbestosis ... the dates on which his injury occurred, the location, the nature of his occupation, and what he was doing that caused his asbestosis”
• stating that \it is not necessary that the exact nature of his injury be known so long as it objectively appears that he is reasonably charged with the knowledge that he has an injury caused by another\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).