Document 4vBddmYdraR7yk6Bo71j1KJxj

KELLEY DRYE & WARREN TAGGART D. ADAMS TRACY . AMBLER DAVID E. BARRY NED H. BA25EN ROBERT D. BICKFORD, JR. WILLIAM C. BLIND LEONARD A. BLUE RICHARD W. BRAQY PAUL R. BRENNER RICHARD G. BRODRICK JOHN M. CALLAGY DAVID R. CHIPMAN BRIAN CHRISTALDI RICHARD J. CONCANNON JEFFREY S. COOK JOHN J.COSTELLO SAMUEL S.CROSS ROBERT E.CROTTY 0-CLARK CUMMINGS EUGENE T. D'ABLEMONT PAUL F DOYLE ROBERT EHRENBARD B. HARRISON FRANKEL JOHN F. GIBBONS PAUL C.GUTH ROBERT L HAIG BEN I. HARAGUCHI WILLIAM C.HECK MARTIN D. HEYERT BUD GEQ. HOLMAN J.OUINCY HUNSICKER, 3RD MICHAEL S. INSEL WILLIAM A. KRQMLEY JOHN J. LYNAGH GEORGE J.MARCHESE LELAND J.MARKLEY FREDERIC S NATHAN CHARLES OECHLER THEODORE PEARSON ALTON E. PETERS EDWARD ROBERTS, HI TERRANCE W. SCHWAB FREDERICK T, SHEA JOHN W. SIMPSON4 FRANCIS Y. SOGI HOWARD S.TUTHILLlH DAVID L- VAUGHAN ALBERT J. WALKER CHAUNCEY L.WALKER LOUIS 8.WARREN E. LISK WYCKOFF, JR. HARVEY FOLKS ZIMANO 101 PARK AVENUE NEW YORK, N . Y. 10178 (212) BOS-7800 CABLE"LAWYERIY" TELEX 12369 TELECOPIER <212) 608-7696 (12) SOS`7698 WRITER'S DIRECT LINE 7711(2I BOB-- WALTER E-BEER. JR. WILLIAM C. BURT 4 JOSEPH W. DRAKE, JR. THOMAS B. GlLCHRfST, JR. ALFRED W. ROBERTS GEORGE SIEGEL COUNSEL 4NOT ADMtTTCO IN NEW YORK January 4, 1984 Alan M. Rubinson, Esq. Law Department - 3259 Union Carbide Corporation Old Ridgebury Road Danbury, CT 06817 Re; Dear Alan: Sireci v. Union Carbide, et al | J Uc ONE LANDMARK SQUARE STAMFORD. CT 0*901 (203) 324-1400 TELECOPIER (203) 327-2S69 30 MAIN STREET DANBURY, CT. 08BI0 (203) 7*3-7610 1333 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVC..N.W. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 (02) 4B3-B333 TELECOPIER (202) *63 6239 IOO NORTH BISCAYNE BLVO. MIAMI. FL. 33132 (30S) 372-0030 AFFILIATED OFFICE HASHIDATE LAW OFFICE MORI BLDG. NO H 11TM FLOOR 2-6*4 TORANOMON 2- CHOME, Ml NATO- KU TOKYO, 105, JAPAN TELEPHONE- 03-602-1007 TELEX: 02226106 HW DEPARTMENT JAM h ifi'M A. M. RUBINSON Thank you for your letter of December 27, 1983. As you recall at the October 13 meeting counsel for each of the co-defendants agreed not to assert cross-claims against each other nor seek discovery from one another, at least initially. It was further agreed that the cross-claims asserted on behalf of Rohm & Haas against each of the co-defendants would be withdrawn. Siff & Newman, attorneys for Monsanto, agreed to draft and circulate an appropriate stipulation withdrawing the cross-claims of Rohm & Haas and reserving t%e rights of each of the co-defendants to assert cross-claims at a later date. As you know upon our receipt of this proposed stipulation, we suggested an amendment which was subsequently agreed to by each of the co-defendants. A revised stipulation was circulated, but we have not yet received a final copy of the stipulation executed by all of the co-defendants. It is our understanding that the attorneys for Rohm & Haas are still awaiting final approval from their clients before executing PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" UCC 087276 KELLEY DRYE & WARREN Alan Rubinson, Esq 2- - January 4, 1984 this agreement. However, we have received assurances that this approval will be forthcoming. At the October 13 conference it was also agreed that Kelley Drye would attempt to set-up a meeting between all of the co-defendants and representatives from Kalex for the purpose of determining whether grounds exist for a motion for summary judgment on the basis of the statue of limitations. My letter to you of December 16, 1983 outlines the progress we have made to date regarding this matter. The co-defendants also agreed at the October 13 meeting to delay bringing any motion to compel plaintiff to respond to the defendants' initial discovery requests. To date plaintiff has not responded to any of the co-defendants discovery requests. Counsel for each of the respective co-defendants have agreed to wait until the meeting with Kalex j before making any such discovery .motions, Me? As requested. lclos;ing copies of various fa )0 litigation papers which^have been served since the October 13 meeting. These paper's include American Cyanamid's verified ^answer, demand for^'medical records and autopsy aufefiorizations, "'"demand for witnesses and party statements, and demand for medical reports. Also included are Rohm & Haas' answer_j*it*i----- gj"oss-claims, demand for a verified bill of partictriSrsT demand or authorizations and notice to take depositions. We have served on behalf of Union Carbide a verified ariswer, a demand for a verified bill of particulars and a demand\ for medical record authorizations. While much of this material may have been forwarded to you previously, I am enclosing a complete set of copies for your file. I will be in touch with you again once f,i^m date for the Kalex meeting has been established. t Best wishes for the New Year. %i>V PRIVILEGED AND sincerely yours. "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" O'Gara UCC 087277 JVOG:mre Enclosure 77^-' -yrfzz1