Document 3yv2G1vp27vMDmyB3LBXQ08a

Law Offices Of LAUGHLIN FALBO LEVY MORES 4 Partnership Including Professional Corporations SACRAMENTO Te l e p h o n e 1916> 441-0045 REDDING Te l e p h o n e (916) 222-0268 Fa c s imil e (916) 222-5705 LONG BEACH Te l e p h o n e (213) 495-3711 Fa c s imil e (213) 495-3225 ICEHOUSE II 151 UNION STREET-SUITE 300 SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94111-1221 TELEPHONE (415) 781-6676 Fa c s imil e (415) 781-6823 Spteittt>S3? 27, 1988 Ann Del Vecchio Self-Insurers Service, Inc. 2620 Augustine Drive, Suite Santa Clara, CA 95054 280 SAN FRANCISCO: MICHAEL W. LAUGHLIN* GERALD A. FALBO* ROGER A. LEVY* i: ALFONSO J. MORESI JOHN T. BENNETT. JR. JAMES R. WESOLOWSKI,,, PATRICIA E. GOULD S TP PHILLIP J. KLEIN BERTA J. GILMAN MARK H. BARBER FREDERICK L. WALTER. JR. LUCILLE M. GRBKNWAY CLARK W. PATTEN STEVEN D. TUAN DAVID W. BOSTON RONALD J. TONBGATO BENJAMIN CINTZ CHERISSE C. DYAS WILLIAM F. HOFFMANN* * GERALD R. BURKE DIANE M. WILLIAMSON JUDITH A. LEICHTNAM MILTON D. LATHAN PHIL N. WALKER SUSAN B. FINTOR SACRAMENTO: GERALD A. FALBO* BARRY M. LESCH DEMETRA G. JOHAL JAMES P. PBTTIBONE REDDING: HENRY M. SLOWIK BRIGHAM F. JONES LONG BEACH: DOUGLAS M, MARSHALL ROBERT E. BABCOCK* M. JOSEPH RODRIQUEZ* * A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 'AOMITTCO VIRGINIA PRACTICE LIMITED TO FEDERAL COURT OF COUNSEL WILLIAM W. WERTZ Re: A , dec'd) v. Kaiser Shipyard #3, et al. WCAB Case No: OAK 141300 Dear Ms. Del Vecchio: REDACTED Our office has been representing the interests of SherwinWilliams on a referral from their corporate counsel in Cleveland, Ohio. The file was originally referred to us for purposes of responding to discovery motions made by Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company. At the time the discovery motions were made, Sherwin-Williams was not a defendant; and, Hartford Accident & Indemnity's counsel was on a fishing expedition in attempts to join new defendants to share the exposure in this cumulative asbestos claim. In our continued representation of Sherwin-Williams, it became necessary to identify insurance carriers for SherwinWilliams and to join them. We have been dealing with Mr. John King of counsel's office in Cleveland, Ohio, and Mr. Tony Colangelo from the employee benefits office. You will note, from copies of our enclosed file materials, that the case has been open some time; but, just recently, it has become more active from the standpoint that joinders have been completed, and the matter has in fact been conferenced, and set for formal hearing. We last attended a conference on September 20, 1988, at N40143 0007-SWP-005S03598 CONFIDENTIAL SIS Re: September 27, Page Two 1988 dec'd) r edac t ed which time the disposition was to set the matter for trial on January 3, 1989, and for further conference on December 5, 1988. Before the conference, discovery is to be completed; and, we are working with Mr. Colangelo in attempting to identify various individuals that are going to be deposed by co-defendant, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company. Since this is a cumulative asbestos claim, we believe that, since Sherwin-Williams became self-insured on August l, 1981, their exposure is very limited; and, it would appear as though the significant exposure would be during the time period of Liberty Mutual's coverage with perhaps some exposure for Aetna Casualty & Surety Company. As of this point in time, there is no medical supporting a claim against Sherwin-Williams; but, then again, there has been no clear-cut asbestos exposure while at Sherwin-Williams. We tend to think that, if co-defendant persists in his efforts to pursue this avenue of discovery, he may come upon some type of minor exposure; but, we do not think there is anything of a significant nature. When we say minor exposure, it may very well be that s working in a plant that may have had some asbestos insulation which may have been worked on over the years; but, we do not think there is as heavy duty asbestos exposure as Mi had while working in the shipyards during World War II. To be quite frank, the recently-joined co-defendants are very upset with counsel from Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company since this is a pure fishing expedition; and, we are all concerned with the fact that Judge Mason has allowed this discovery to continue. There is not one iota of evidence of any exposure at Sherwin-Williams; yet, simply because Mr. forked in the major plant, counsel thinks that entitles him to additional joinder, and, as you can well imagine, other significant expenses being incurred by the co-defendants in continuing to defend this matter. If you would like to further discuss this matter following review of the enclosed materials, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Since the proper joinders and carriers have been identified, we are going to take somewhat of a low profile in regards to development of further medical since we do not see any exposure at this juncture. We will work closely with Mr. Colangelo in developing the names of individuals whose depositions should be taken, as well as working with co-defendants in being certain that. 0007-SWP-005803599 CONFIDENTIAL SIS Re: September 27, Page Three 1988 ec'd) REDACTED if medical is necessary, it has in fact been obtained. We look forward to working with you on this matter; and, as always, please feel free to contact the undersigned should you have any questions at any time during the remainder of the time the claim remains active. Very truly yours, LAUGHLIN, FALBO, LEVY & MORESI ALFONSO J. MORES! By: Alfonso J. Moresi AJM/jm Enclosure cc: John F. King, Esq., Sherwin-Williams Company, 101 Prospect Avenue, N.W., Cleveland, OH 44115-1075 Tony Colangelo, Sherwin-Williams Company, 101 Prospect Avenue, N.W., Cleveland, OH 44115-1075 0007-SWP-005803600 CONFIDENTIAL