Document 6rNK2Dn5rdQR1J760K6QDLy4

c >V LAW DEPARTMENT TIDE WATER ASSOCIATED OIL COMPANY ASSOCIATED DIVISION 79 Ne w Mo n t g o me r y St r e e t Sa n Fr a n c i s c o , Ca l i f o r n i a July 17 1S3S Dr. Robert .. Kehoe, University of Cincinnati College of Hedicine, Cincinnati, Ohio. Dear Dr. this will acknowledge receipt of your letter of 9 inst. in which I note that you vdll be here about 25 inst. i would very much like to see you some time dur ing your stay here, and trust that you will be able to spend some time --ith me. I hope, also, that your plans will be such that you will have the opportunity to have lunch or dinner with me and perhaps to give me a chance to show you something of our Exposition. After I filed my Petition in the Telepnev case, the Commission "iled a seventy-page Answer. The Answer was devoted primarily to establishing that Telepnev had lead poisoning, but contained nothing to show any causal connection between his dis ability and his employment. It failed to meet my challenge to show even a single sentence of testimony to support such conten tion. I filed a Reply to this Answer and called the Court's attention to the fact-that this lengthy Answer of the Commission had failed to point out in any respect that there was a causal connection between the disability and the employment. I am sorry to say, however, that despite this fact, the Supreme Court has issued its Order denying the Petition for Rehearing, which means that we do not even get a chance to argue the matter before the Supreme Court. There is practically nothing else we can do, so I presume we will have to pay this Award. I am completely at a loss to understand the Court's refusal to hear the Petition. Jith kind regards, I am N 24395 Sincerely yours,