Document 7MOqwvOBnYNJYGoe6pEJYV9aE

1 PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER 555 South Flower Street 2 Twenty-Second Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 3 (213) 489-4000 4 5 Attorneys for Defendant GAF Corporation 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 11 ROBERT BUZZARD, JR., ) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) 13 v. ) ) ) 14 JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION, ) etc., et al., ' 15 Defendants. 16 ) ) ) ) 17 AND RELATED CASES ) ) _) 18 CASE NO. C 295 122 RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT GAF CORPORATION TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 19 TO PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEY OF RECORD: 20 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 21 2030, defendant GAF CORPORATION (hereinafter "GAF") responds, 22 under oath, to plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories as 23 follows: 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 2: 12 Please state the address of your principal place of 13 business and whether you have assumed the assets and/or 14 laibilities of any predecessor corporation or entity (such 15 predecessor corporations being limited to any association 16 whatsoever with the asbestos aspect of the defendant's 17 business). Answer these Interrogatories for each such acquired 18 company which manufactured insulation products containing 19 asbestos. 20 21 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2: 22 GAF's principal place of business is 140 West 51st 23 Street, New York, New York, 10020. In 1967 The Ruberoid Company 24 merged into GAF by means of a statutory merger by which GAF 25 assumed both the assets and liabilities of the Ruberoid Company. 26 // 27 // 28 // 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 2 Has defendant, at any time, engaged in the manufacture 3 of insulation products containing asbestos fibers? 4 5 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 6 Yes. ' ' '* 7 8 INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 9 Has defendant, at any time, engaged in the mining and/or 10 milling of material containing asbestos fibers? 11 12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 13 Yes. 14 15 INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 16 Has defendant, at any time, engaged in the processing, 17 marketing and sale of products containing asbestos fibers? 18 19 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5: f 20 Objection: Overly broad; vague and ambiguous as to the 21 term "processing"; neither relevant to the subject matter of this 22 action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 23 admissible evidence. Without waiving said objections - and 24 reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to 25 compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it produced 26 industrial thermal insulation products containing asbestos. 27 // 28 -3- ' 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 2 If the answer to one or more of the last three questions 3 is affirmative, please state as to each affirmative answer the 4 following: 5 a) The trade or brand name of each such product mined, 6 manufactured, and/or marketed. 7 b) The dates each of such products were placed on the 8 market. 9 c) The dates each of such products were withdrawn from 10 the market. 11 d) A description of the physical (the chemical) 12 composition of each such product including the type of 13 asbestos contained in each such product (i.e., amosite, 14 chrysotile or crocidolite) and the quantitative 15 percentage of asbestos in each product. 16 e) A description of the physical appearance of each 17 such product. 18 f) A detailed description of the intended uses of each 19 such* product. 20 h) The mining or milling concern from which the raw 21 asbestos fiber was obtained. 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 24 Objection: Overly broad; neither relevant to the 25 subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead 26 to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said 27 objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of 28 a motion to-compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that -4. 1 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 1; 2 State the name, present business address, present 3 residence, and capacity or title of the individual signing these 4 Interrogatories on behalf of the answering defendant. 5 'irtvv ( 1 1 it manufactured the following industrial thermal insulation 2 products containing asbestos: 3 a) (1) Calsilite: High temperature pipe covering and 4 Vs.'lfF built-up block containing approximately 10% amosite asbestos fiber and 2% chrysotile asbestos fiber. The 6 remainder consists of hydrous lime silicate and 7 diatomaceous earth. Calsilite is white and hollow. 8 Calsilite was manufactured at Gloucester, New Jersey 9 from 1949 until October, 1971. 10 s^ (2) Insulation Cements "115" and "214" Insulation Cements: Known generally as ' 12 7M and 7K type cements, respectively. These cements 13 were off-white to light grey in color and were composed ( 14 \ 15 entirely of chrysotile asbestos fiber. The cements were manufactured at Hyde Park, Vermont from 1937 through 16 September, 1975. sni. ctf18 Calsilite insulation cement was composed of 36.8% ground Calsilite, 45% chrysotile asbestos fiber, 13.6% 19 Lumm^te Cement, and 4.5% Portland Cement. It was 20 lighter in appearance and texture than other GAF 21 isulation cements, and had a somewhat chalky 22 consistency. Calsilite insulation cement was produced 23 at Gloucester City, New Jersey from 1951 until around 24 0 '$25 1960. (3) "T/NA-100" Insulation Jacketing: A grayish- 26 white two-ply laminated product consisting of an 27 interior layer of asbestos paper containing 40% 28 chrysotile asbestos fiber bounded with neoprene to a -5- 1 layer of polyvinylfluoride (Tedlar) plastic film on the 2 exterior of the product. T/NA-100 was manufactured at 3 South Bound Brook, New Jersey from 1962 to September, 4 1971. 5 /M>- 6 (4) Asbestos paper, millboard and rollboard: " Products composed of sulphite pulp and chrysotile 7 asbestos. The asbestos content of papers and millboards I varied from 40% to 90%, depending on the product. The e 9 color of such products varied from light grey to dark 10 grey. These products were manufactured in Erie, 11 Pennsylvania from before World War II, until 1981. 12 b) See response to Interrogatory No. 6(a) above. 13 c) See response to Interrogatory No. 6(a) above. 14 d) See response to Interrogatory No. 6(a) above. 15 e) See response to Interrogatory No. 6(a) above. 16 f) Each product was used for industrial thermal 17 insulation purposes. 18 g) The manufacturer until 1967 was the Ruberoid 19 Company. After 1967, the manufacturer was GAF 20 Corporation. 21 22 (Wckd h) Carey Canadian Mines, Inc., Canadian Johns-Manvilie Corporation; Lake Asbestos of Quebec, Ltd.; Bell Mines; 23 fiW 24 Johnson Asbestos; Johnson's Co's. Ltd.; Asbestos Corpo ration; North American Asbestos Co.,; Cape Asbestos 25 Corp.,; Union Carbide; The Ruberoid Company; Vermont 26 Asbestos Group. 27 // 28 // -6- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 2 Have any of the products listed in Interrogatory No. .6 a> above been altered in chemical composition or asbestos type or 4 content since first being marketed? 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 7 Yes. 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 10 If so, please state: 11 a) The trade name of each such product. 12 b) The date each such product was altered. 13 c) The nature of the alteration. 14 d) The reason for the alteration. 15 16 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 17 The Calsilite formula was adjusted constantly in order 18 to compensate for changes in the quality and availibility of raw 19 material, as Hell as for competitive reasons. Aside from such 20 general changes to achieve product quality, a major change in 21 composition took place in 1954, when all Vermont chrysotile 22 asbestos was eliminated from the product. A second major change 23 in composition occurred in the mid-1960's, when Ruberoid 24 developed "Calsili.te SS." Calsilite SS was an "inhibited" 25 product designed specifically to prevent stress corrosion and 26 chloride cracking of austenitic stainless steel piping. Another 27 major change in composition occurred in 1970, when GAF developed 28 an asbestos-free Calsilite, also occasionally referred to as -8- 1 "Calsilite II". In the asbestos-free Calsilite, asbestos was 2 replaced by sulphite pulp. The asbestos-free product was 3 discontinued because it was unprofitable. 4 5 INTERROGATORY NO. 11: 6 Do any written memoranda, specifications, blueprints or 7 other written materials of any kind or character exist relating 6 to the testing of said products? 9 10 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11: v 11 No. 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 12: 14 Did defendant make any design changes as a result of 15 such tests? 16 17 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12: 18 Not applicable. 19 20 INTERROGATORY NO. 13: 21 If so, please state: 22 a) The nature of the change made. 23 b) The name, address, and job classification of each 24 person in charge of making a change. 25 i 26 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13: 27 Not applicable. 28 // ; -9- i 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 14: , 2 Has defendant, at any time, published and/or distributed 3 any brochures, sales literature, pamphlets, or other written 4 materials (aside from caution labels on containers) of any kind 5 or character that contain any warnings, cautions, caveats or 6 Aft*? f8 9 directions concerning the possibility of injury resulting from the use of the products listed in Interrogatory No. 6 above? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14: 10 Objection: Overly broad; vague; ambiguous. Without 11 waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in 12 the event of a motion to compel further answers or at trial GAF 13 responds that it published warning and cautionary labels for its 14 industrial thermal insulation products containing asbestos 15 fiber. Defendant's other literature speaks for itself. 16 17 INTERROGATORY NO. 15: 18 From 1930 until the present, did the asbestos products 19 manufactured ojr distributed by you, contain any warning, caution, 20 caveat or other statement on the product or its packaging. 21 22 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15: 23 Objection: Overly broad; vague, ambiguous; neither 24 relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably 25 calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 26 Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert 27 same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or at 28 trial, GAF responds that it no longer produces any industrial -10- ( ' r thermal insulation products containing asbestos fibers. However, 2 when said products vere manufactured, warning and cautionary 3 labels were placed on the outside packaging. 4 5 INTERROGATORY NO. 16: 6 If so, please state: 7 a) When did the warning first appear? 8 b) What was the precise wording of the warning, when 9 it first appeared? 10 c) Was the warning altered, amended or changed in any 11 manner? Zf so, how and when? 12 d) Where was the warning located on the product or 13 packaging? 14 e) When did you become aware of warnings placed on 15 products distributed by other defendants? State the 16 reason warnings of the other defendants were not placed 17 on your products. 18 f) State the manner in which your product is shipped 19 and he type of container it is shipped in to retailers. 20 g) State whether any indistrial psychologists or human 21 factors engineers were consulted prior to utilizing such 22 warnings, cautions, etc. 23 24 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 16: 25 See objections to Interrogatories Nos. 14 and 15. 26 Without waiving said objections, GAF responds as follows: 27 // 28 // -11- 1 a) Warning labels were placed on packages of 2 industrial thermal insulation products containing 3 asbestos in approximately late 1964 and early 1965. 4 b) "CAUTION. THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBER.^ 5 INHALATION OF ASBESTOS IN EXCESSIVE QUANTITIES OVER LONG 6 PERIODS OF TIME MAY BE HARMFUL. IF DUST IS CREATED WHEN 7 THIS PRODUCT IS HANDLED, AVOID BREATHING THE DUST. IF 6 ADEQUATE VENTILATION CONTROL IS NOT POSSIBLE, WEAR 9 RESPIRATORS APPROVED BY THE U. S. BUREAU OF MINES FOR 10 PNEUMOCONIOSIS PRODUCING DUST." 11 c) In 1970, this warning label was changed to read as 12 follows: 13 WARNING 14 CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBER. INHALATION IN 15 EXCESSIVE QUANTITIES OVER LONG PERIODS OF TIME MAY 16 BE HARMFUL. AVOID BREATHING DUST. IF ADEQUATE 17 VENTILATION IS NOT POSSIBLE, WEAR RESPIRATORS 18 APPROVED BY THE U.S. BUREAU OF MINES FOR 19 PNEUMOCONIOSIS PRODUCING DUST. * 20 In approximately 1972, this warning was 21 further changed to read as follows: 22 CAUTION 23 CONTAINS ASBESTOR FIBERS. INHALATION IN 24 EXCESSIVE QUANTITIES OVER LONG PERIODS OF TIME MAY 25 BE HARMFUL. AVOID BREATHING DUST. 26 d) On the outside of pa-ckages of industrial thermal 27 insulation products containing asbestos fiber. 28 -12- l 1 e) Approximately 1965. GAF objects to the remainder 2 of this interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague, 3 ambiguous and calls for speculation. 4 f) Calsilite was shipped in corrugated cardboard 5 cartons. 115 and 214 Cement was shipped in heavy duty 6 bags. T/N/A 100 sheets were sold in rolls and shipped V in corrugated cardboard boxes. Asbestos paper and 8 millboard were shipped in corrugated cardboard cartons, 9 although millboard is sometimes stacked on trucks 10 without boxes. 11 g) Unknown. 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 17: 14 Have you received notice that any other person was 15 claiming injury as a result of using asbestos products 16 manufactured and/or sold by your company (both prior to and 17 subsequent to the filing of this action)? 18 19 -R--E--S--P--O--N---S--E----T--O-----IN---T,-E--R--R--O---G--A---T-O---R--Y----N---O--.----1--7- : 20 Yes. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 18: 23 If so, please state: 24 a) The name and address of each claimant. 25 b) The date of notice of each claim. 26 c) A description of the claim, i.e., worker's 27 compensation, products liability, etc. 28 d) The type of injuries allegedly sustained. -13- 1 e) The name and address of each attorney who represents 2 individuals making such claims. 3 f) The style and court number of each cl^aim currently 4 pending. 5 g) The resolution of each claim that has been settled 6 or taken to judgment. 7 8 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18: ) 9 Objection: Burdensome; oppressive. As plaintiff is 10 well aware, GAF has been named as a defendant in numerous actions 11 in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Nationwide, GAF has been 12 named in approximately 10,000 actions. 13 Without waiving said objection, GAF responds that the 14 first asbestos-related lawsuit naming GAF as a defendant was 15 Totter v. Fibreboard, et al.. (USDC E.D. Texas; CV 7329; filed 16 July 29, 1969). 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 19: 19 Do yop have any records indicating that any of your 20 products containing asbestos fibers were sold to any of the 21 companies named as co-defendants in this suit? 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19: 24 Objection.: Overly broad as to time and place; burden 25 some; oppressive; neither relevant to the subject matter of this 26 action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 27 admissible evidence. Without waiving objections and reserving 28 the right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel -14- i t 1 further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has in its jt) 2 possession certain shipping records of its industrial thermal o 3 insulation products containing asbestos. The information 4 contained therein is retrievable by reference of year, company, K ri 8 shipped to and/or jobsite shipped to. The documents are available for inspection at GAF's principal place of business at a time which is mutually convenient for GAF and for plaintiff's counsel. 9 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 20: 11 If so, please state: 12 a) The name, address and job classification of each 13 individual who currently has possession of such records. 14 b) Please list the names of each co-defendant to whom 15 your products have been sold. 16 c) Please state the dates of each such sale and the 17 amount and kind of materials sold. 18 d) State whether your company manufactured asbestos 19 containing insulation products; for a co-defendant but 20 placed said co-defendant's labels, logos or containers 21 on said products and list each such co-defendants [sic]. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 20: 24 a-c) See responses to Interrogatory No. 19, above, 25 d) No. 26 II 27 II 28 11 -15- I i I 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 21: 2 Does defendant contend that plaintiff improperly used 3 their products? 4 5 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 21: 6 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 7 assumes GAF products were used. Without waiving said objection 8 and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion 9 to compel further answers and at the trial of this action, GAF 10 responds as follows. GAF has not completed investigation of the 11 facts relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not completed preparation for trial. Therefore, the following Un13 answer is given without prejudice to its right to produce 14 evidence of any subsequently discovered facts. At this time, so 15 far as is known, GAF answers yes. 16 17 INTERROGATORY NO. 22: 18 If so, please set out in detail in what respect said 19 products were improperly used. 2d 21 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 22: 22 See objection and caveat to Interrogatory No. 21. 23 Subject to the foregoing, GAF responds that plaintiff may have 24 ignored oral and/or written instructions or otherwise not used 25 asbestos containing products in a manner intended or reasonably 26 foreseeable. 27 // 28 // -16- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 23: 2 Does defendant have policies of insurance that cover the 3 claims that have been made by plaintiff herein? 4 5 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 23: 6 Yes. 7 e INTERROGATORY NO. 24: 9 If so, please list the name of each insurance carrier 10 who has coverage, the amount of such coverage, and the dates of n each such policy? 12 13 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 24: 14 Objection: Overly broad; burdensome; neither relevant 15 to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to 16 lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving 17 said objections, GAF responds that a schedule containing part of 18 the information requested in this interrogatory is attached 19 hereto as Exhibit A. 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 25: 22 Does defendant contend that insulation products containing asbestos can be manufactured or treated so as to 24 eliminate all potential health hazards to workers installing 25 same? 26 // 27 // 28 // * -17- i 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 25: 2 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 3 calls for speculation and expert medical opinion. 4 5 INTERROGATORY NO. 26: 6 If so, please explain. 7 8 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 26: 9 See objection to Interrogatory No. 25, above. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 27: 12 Please describe in detail the type of packages in which 13 defendant has sold asbestos material, listing the dates each type 14 of package was used, a physical description thereof, and a 15 description of any printed material or trade marks that appeared 16 thereon. 17 If RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 27: 19 From Che late 1940's to 1971, calsilite pipe covering 20 was sold in corrugated cardboard boxes. From 1962 to 1971, T/NA21 100 was sold in corrugated boxes, as was asbestos paper and 22 millboard from before World War II, until 1981. From 1937 to 23 1975, 115 and 124 insulation cements were sold in heavy duty 24 bags. All corrugated boxes and heavy duty bags bore the company 25 name or logo and tradename. Other specific descriptive language 26 appearing on'those packages is unknown, except that in some 27 instances the temperatures up to which the product could be used 28 did appear thereon. -18- i 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 28: 2 Did you receive any reports or communications from your 3 workmen's compensation insurance carrier or products liability 4 insurance carrier with regard to the hazards incident to use of 5 asbestos containing insulation products? If so, please state who 6 had possession of said reports, the location of said reports and 7 the substance of the contents of said reports, listing for each 8 such report the respective insurance company, its address, and 9 the agent signing such correspondence. 10 11 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 28: 12 Objection: Attorney-client privilege; attorney work- 13 product limitation on discovery; vague; ambiguous; burdensome; 14 oppressive. Without waiving, said objections and reserving the 15 right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further 16 answers or at trial, GAF responds that it does not believe so. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 29: 19 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 4 (mining and 4 20 milling) is yes, state: 21 a) Where the asbestos was mined and milled. 22 b) How long the defendant has mined and milled 23 asbestos. 24 c) Whether the defendant has supplied this mined 25 and/or milled asbestos to any of the other defendants 26 since 1950, when these transactions took place; and the 27 dollar and tonnage amount of such sales. 28 // -19- 1 d) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats or 2 directions accompanied the materials referred to in (c) 3 and the date these first - appeared. 4 5 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 29: 6 a) Hyde Park, Vermont. 7 b) 1936-1975. 8 c) See response to Interrogatory No. 19. 9 d) See response to Interrogatory No. 29(c). 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 30: 12 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 4 is no, state: 13 a) From what source or sources, if any, did your 14 company obtain mined asbestos since 1950; 15 b) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats, or 16 directions accompany the materials referred to in (a) 17 and the nature and extent of said warnings, cautions, 18 caveats or directions accompanying said asbestos. 19 c) ^Approximately what date said warnings, cautions, 20 caveats or directions first appeared on the mined 21 asbestos. 22 23 - RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 30: 24 Not applicable. 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 -20- { 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 31: 2 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 3 is yes, state: 3 I a) Where the asbestos or asbestos materials was * 4 manufactured. 5 b) How long the defendant has manufactured asbestos or 6 asbestos materials. 7 c) Whether the defendant has supplied this 8 manufactured asbestos or asbestos materials to any of 9 the other defendants since 1945, when these transactions 10 took place, where, and the compensation paid for the 11 manufactured asbestos or asbestos materials; 12 d) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats or 13 directions accompanied the materials referred to in (c) 14 and the date these first appeared. 0 15 16 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 31: 17 a) Asbestos is not manufactured. Products containing 18 asbestos were manufactured in Gloucester City, New 19 Jersey. Calsilite, asbestos paper and millboard were t 20 manufactured in Erie, Pennsylvania. 115 and 214 Cement 21 was processed at Hyde Park, Vermont. T/NA-100 was 22 manufactured in South Bound Brook, New Jersey. 23 b) See response to Interrogatory No. 6(a) above. 24 c) GAF objects to part (c) of this interrogatory on 25 the grounds of relevance. Without waiving said 26 objection, GAF responds that it has in its possession 27 certain shipping records of its industrial thermal 28 insulation products containing asbestos. The . * -21- i 1 information contained therein is retrievable by 2 reference of year, company shipped to and/or jobsite 3 shipped to. The documents are available for inspection 4 at GAF's principal place of business at a time which is 5 mutually convenient for GAF and for plaintiff's counsel. 6 d) See objection to Interrogatory No. 19, above. broajl ( burd<\s&rx-e t ('rrel&0Q,M ( -drc. 7 8 INTERROGATORY NO. 32: 9 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 3 is no, state: 10 a) From what source or sources, if any, did your 11 company obtain asbestos containing insulation since 12 1945. 13 b) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats, or 14 directions accompany the material referred to in (a) and 15 the nature and extent of said warnings, cautions, 16 caveats or directions accompanying said asbestos and 17 asbestos materials. 18 c) Approximately what date said warnings, cautions, 19 caveats or directions first appeared on the manufactured 4 20 asbestos or asbestos materials. 21 22 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 32: 23 Not applicable. 24 25 INTERROGATORY NO. 33: 26 Has the defendant imported asbestos or asbestos 27 materials since 1930? 28 // -22- i 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 33: 2 Yes. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 34: 5 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 6 affirmative, state: 7 a) From where the asbestos or asbestos materials was 8 [sic] imported. 9 b) How long the defendant has imported asbestos and 10 asbestos materials. 11 c) Whether the defendant has supplied this imported 12 asbestos or asbestos materials to any of the other 13 defendants since 1945, when these transactions took 14 place and where. 15 d) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats, or 16 directions accompanied the materials referred to in (c) 17 and the date these first appeared. 18 19 r '21 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 34: ------------------------------------------------------ j---------------------------------------------------------------------- a) South Africa, Canada and the United States. b) No records available. 22 c) See objection and response to Interrogatory No. 19. 23 d) See responses to Interrogatory No. 15 and 24 Interrogatory No. 16. 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 35: 27 Has the defendant sold or distributed asbestos or 28 asbestos containing insulation materials at any time since 1930? 'J -23- i ( 1 RESPONSE TO-INTERROGATORY NO. 35: 2 Products were sold by GAF, not distributed. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 36: 5 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 6 affirmative, state: 7 a) Where the defendant has sold or distributed such 8 products since 1930. 9 b) How long the defendant has sold or distributed such 10 products. 11 c) Whether the defendant has sold or distributed such 12 products to any of the other defendants named in this 13 litigation since 1930 and state the dollar and tonnage 14 amounts of such sales and the dates of same. 15 16 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 36: 17 a) Objection: irrelevant; burdensome; oppressive. 18 b) Approximately 1928-1975. See response to 19 Interrogatory No. 6, above. 20 c) See objection and response to Interrogatories Nos. 21 19 and 20, above. ('`Sacd&ySo^-d, -chc- 22 -- - -* oo--- 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 37: 24 If the answer to subpart (c) of Interrogatory No. 36 is 25 in the affirmative, state: 26 a) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats or 27 directions accompany the asbestos or asbestos materials 28 sold or distributed to these other defendants, the -24- < content of said warnings, cautions, caveats, or 2 directions accompanying said asbestos, 3 b) Approximately what date said warnings, cautions, 4 caveats or directions first appeared on asbestos 5 materials distributed to the other defendants. 6 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 37; 8 See responses to Interrogatory No. 15, Interrogatory 9 No. 16, Interrogatory No. 19 and Interrogatory No. 20 above. INTERROGATORY NO. 38: If the defendant has discontinued manufacturing and/or selling any asbestos products, please state the reason or reasons therefor. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 38: Continued manufacturing of products containing asbestos was not profitable. ft INTERROGATORY NO. 39: Have any of the other defendants named in the litigation ever furnished the defendant answering these interrogatories with information as to the state of the medical knowledge regarding the connection between asbestos exposure and the contracting of pulmonary diseases including cancer and asbestosis? // // 28 // -25- fas (0l( iVfo -Hr r-d* (C.4p 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 39: 2 No, with the exception of preparation of pretrial 3 litigation. 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 40: 5 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 6 affirmative, state: 7 a) What information was the defendant furnished with. 8 b) When the defendant was furnished the information. 9 c) .By whom was the defendant furnished the information. 10 11 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 40: 12 Not applicable. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 41: 15 Have any defendants furnished this defendant, or has 16 this defendant furnished any other defendant with the results of 17 any research, tests, medical studies or experiments regarding the 18 state of the medical knowledge as to the connection between 19 asbestos exposure and the contracting of pulmonary diseases, I 20 including lung cancer and asbestosis, since 1930? 21 22 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 41: 23 No, with the exception of preparation of pretrial 24 litigation. 5 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 42: 27 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 28 affirmative, state: -26- 1 a) When each took place. 2 b) Who participated in each. 3 c) Summarize the content of ^ach document or l 4 communication. 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 42: 7 Not applicable. * 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 43: 10 Has the defendant become aware, as the result of other 11 litigation or by any other means, of any studies, research, 12 experiments or tests conducted by another defendant which, if 13 known at the time said study, research, experiment or tests were 14 made, would have altered the manner or way the defendant 15 answering these interrogatories acted in distributing these 16 asbestos products? 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 43: 19 GAP objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 20 calls for speculation, conclusion and expert medical opinion. In 21 addition, GAF objects on the grounds that it is vague and 22 ambiguous. Without waiving these objections, GAF responds that 23 it was not a distributor. 24 25 INTERROGATORY NO. 44: 26 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 27 affirmative, state: 28 // -27- f 1 a) When these studies, research, experiments or tests 2 were made. 3 b) By whom were these studies, research, experiments or 4 tests made. 5 c) Summarize the contents of these studies and how the 6 defendant would have acted differently. 7 8 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 44: 9 Not applicable. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 45; 12 Please state if the defendant or anybody on behalf of 13 the defendant ever conducted or sponsored or contributed 14 financially to any studies or research to determine if the 15 inhalation of asbestos fibers may be harmful. If so, please 16 state: 17 a) By whom the research was conducted, giving complete 18 names and addresses. 19 b) Tie dates that each such test was conducted. 20 c) The complete results of each test or study. 21 d) Supply copies of reports of the research department 22 pertaining to the use by the corporation of asbestos in 23 their manufactured insulation products. 24 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 45: 26 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds of 27 overbreadth, burdensome and oppressive. GAF also objects on the 28 grounds that this interrogatory is vague and ambiguous as to the -28- < d wf, 1 meaning of the term "harmful" and as to time. This interrogatory 4 1 (Y\rC.t is further objected to as an improper and burdensome request for 3 production of documents. Without waiving said objections, GAF responds that it did not, by itself, finance, conduct or sponsor any such studies or research. GAF did and does belong to certain trade associations and other organizations. -> ftSSDt- s 8 INTERROGATORY NO. 46: 9 Please state the names and addresses of the defendant's 10 fib ftitfia> l^f. chief medical officers from 1930 until the present time, listing the periods of time each such medical officer was employed by defendant and in what capacity. 13 / 14 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 46: v 15 GAF did not have an employee whose title or function was 16 Chief Medical Officer. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 47: 19 Please state to whom in the corporate structure the 20 chief medical officer reports, also giving that person's position 21 or job title with defendant. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 47: 24 See response to Interrogatory No. 46, above. - 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 48: 27 Please state the duties and responsibilities of the 28 corporation's chief medical officer. -29- ( 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 48: 2 See response to Interrogatory No. 46, above. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 49: 5 Please state the names and addresses of all physicians 6 who were employed, retained or otherwise engaged by the defendant 7 at any of its facilities from the years of 1930 until the present 6 time. 9 10 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 49: 11 Objection: Overly broad as to time; vague; ambiguous; 12 burdensome; oppressive; neither relevant to the subject matter of 13 this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 14 admissible evidence. Without waiving said objections and 15 reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to 16 compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that from time 17 to time during the period beginning in approximately 1930, GAF 18 called upon local physicians from surrounding cities or towns 19 near its plant locations to perform routine physical examinations 20 and to administer routine medical treatment when and if neces 21 sary. There are no records presently within the possession, 22 custody or control of GAF which reflects the names of these 23 physicians or the professional services performed by them. 24 25 INTERROGATORY NO. 50: 26 Please state the names and addresses of all persons 27 employed by defendant from 1930 until the present time who 28 functioned as industrial hygienists. As contemplated by these -30- i 1 Interrogatory, an industrial hygienist is one that performs 2 engineering and health studies to identify, and evaluate 3 potential occupational health hazards and suggests methods of 4 dealing with same. Please state: I sfs 6 a) The facility or office to which they were assigned, b) Their complete and precise duties and 7 responsibilities. B 9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 50: 10 GAF did not employ any persons whose title or function 11 was that of industrial hygienist. 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 51: 14 Please state if the defendant's medical officers ever t 15 made at any time any recommendations and/or suggestions to the 16 defendant pertaining to the risks or hazards to persons involved 17 in the manufacturing or use of insulation products containing 18 asbestos? If so, please state: 19 a) Where were such recommendations and/or suggestions t 20 made? 21 b) To whom were such recommendations and/or suggestions 22 made? 23 c) By whom were these recommendations and/or 24 suggestions made? 25 d) The substance of the recommendations and/or 26 suggestions made? 27 // 28 // -31- I . 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 51: 2 Not applicable. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 52: 5 Please state the names of trade association periodicals 6 W'r, jr<#8 to which the defendant subscribed from 1928 to the present date. State whether or not the defendant had any knowledge of any articles being printed in industry trade journals, essays, p&iCf 9 memoranda and other similar sources pertaining to the hazardous 10 potentials of asbestos and which of such articles were received 11 by you. ^ 12 13 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 52: 14 Objection: Overly broad; burdensome; vague; ambiguous; 15 oppressive. Without waiving said objections and reserving the 16 right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further 17 answers or at trial, GAF responds that this information is 18 unknown at this time. 19 20 INTERROGATORY NO. 53: 21 Please state organizations, groups, inter-company or in 22 dustrial organizations to which the defendant belongs which con 23 ducted studies or researched the relationship, if any, between 24 exposure to asbestos fibers or products and asbestosis and lung 25 cancer from 1945 to 1970. 26 // 27 // 28 // -32- . 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 53: Objection: Assumes fact that a relationship exists ( between exposure to asbestos fibers or? products and lung disease; argumentative. Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further 6 answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has belonged to the 7 following trade associations: 8 Asbestos Information Association/ North American 9 Suite 914 1660 L Street, N.W. 10 Washington, D. C. 20036 11 12 13 14 ( 15 16 National Insulation Manufacturers Association, Inc. 441 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017 Asbestos Cement Product Association (believed defunct) American Society of Testing Materials Race Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 17 INTERROGATORY NO. 54: 18 Please state the amounts spent or contributed by the 19 defendant annually from 1930 until the present time for research 20 specifically directed to the relationship, if any, between an lo dueJr ionfrv Ration insulation worker's exposure to asbestos containing insulation products and asbestosis, lung cancer or any other pulmonary disease. l?WcV\ 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 54: 26 Objection: Assumes fact that a relationship exists ( 27 between exposure to asbestos and asbestosis, lung cancer or any 28 other pulmonary disease; argumentative.. Without waiving said -33- 1 objections and reserving the. right to assert same in the event of 2 a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that 3 it has made no direct contribution of funds to such research. * n 4 5 INTERROGATORY NO. 55: 6 Please state the amount annually contributed by the 7 defendant to any independent medical research group or groups 8 conducting research into the relationship, if any, between 9 exposure of insulation workers to asbestos and any pulmonary 10 diseases. 11 12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 55: 13 Objection: Assumes fact that a relationship exists 14 between exposure of workers to asbestos and any pulmonary 15 disease; argumentative. Without waiving said objections and 16 reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to 17 compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has made 18 no direct contributions. 19 I 20 INTERROGATORY NO. 56: 21 Please state the names and addresses of the organizations 22 or groups conducting the studies referred to in answer to Inter 23 rogatory Nos. 54 and/or 55. 24 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 56: 26 Not applicable. 27 // // . -34- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 57: Please state whether the defendant has a department, h Pod- ' 3 division or section devoted to scientific and/or medical research 4 during the period from 1930 until the present time. If so, 5 please state when it was first formed. 6 Dc^r- 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 57: j m^ e The Ruberoid Company had a product research department * ^<e$> 9 from at least as early as 1947 through 1967 when the company 10 merged with GAF. GAF has continued to maintain a research 11 department from that date to present. 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 58; s llnfrbuP 14 $ ii/^f 15 . UlW 16 /W- 17 teriodtcei/ziB i Subsea - *> 20 ! 21 Please state the scientific or medical periodicals to which the defendant, its medical department or industrial hygiene division subscribed during the period between 1930 and 1964 specifying the date such subscriptions were begun. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 58: Objection: Overly broad; burdensome; oppressive. Without waiving said objections, and reserving the right to - 22 assert same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or 23 at trial, GAF responds that the information requested is not 24 known at this time. , 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 59: t ( 27 Please state whether any of the distributors of your as 28 bestos containing insulation products were provided with any -35- I 1 special instructions, oral or written, in regard to utilizing 2 said products in a manner so as to avoid exposing workers to 3 amounts of dust exceeding threshold limit values. If so, please state: lpsf(i/do<i> -ftr hd- 7 use 8 in '. 9 10 (taels ii a) When these instructions were given. b) By whom these instructions were given. c) Were the instructions oral or written. d) The precise content of the instructions. e) If the instructions were written, please attach a copy of the instructions. 12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY WO. 59: 13 Instructions as to use were provided in written warning 14 labels which were placed on packages of industrial thermal 15 insulation products containing asbestos in approximately late 16 1964 and early 1965. See response to Interrogatory No. 16, 17 above. CCbui'o.- Io0>ei 18 19 INTERROGATORY NO. 60: 20 Pleas'e state whether any employee of the defendant has 21 ever made a claim for asbestosis under the Occupational Disease 22 or Worker's Compensation Statute of any state. If so, please n. 23 state the date that the defendant first received notice of any ^ 24 claim for asbestosis under the Occupational Disease or Worker- 25 men's Compensation Statute of any state and state the total 26 number of claims filed for the years 1930 to 1965. 27 // 28 // -36- ( 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 60: 2 Objection: Overly broad; burdensome; neither relevant 3 to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to 4 lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 5 * * 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 61: i* Iht 7 Is the defendant a member of the Asbestos Tile 8 Institute? If so, when did it first become a member and list the of 9 years inclusively of membership? ITS i ii RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 61: 12 No. 13 14 }Kfiiion ujitr 16 ^ 17 terdfifl i8 rl V;: INTERROGATORY NO. 62: State whether any representatives of the defendant was [sic] a member of the Air Hygiene committee of the ATI or ever attended any meetings of such committee and list the years of such membership. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 62: Unknown. 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 63: i 24 T) r&jPV to^-*8 26 27 ^ v 26 State whether the defendant received copies of tran scribed minutes of the various committee meetings, general meetings and Board of Directors meetings of the ATI within one year of each such meeting. // -37- tI 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 63: 2 GAF has no record or present knowledge of ever having 3 received any documents prior to the commencement of discovery 4 proceedings in asbestos-related actions. 5* 6 hi/! 7 \/djM 8 g 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 64: Has the defendant ever been a member of the Industrial Hygiene Foundation or the Industrial Health Foundation, and if so, please state the years inclusively of such membership. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 64: fdirC' 12 No. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 65: *+ 15 ^ 16 ^f'3 17 State whether any representative of the defendant was in attendance at the 20th annual meeting of the IHF in November, 1955, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and, if so, give the name and current address of such attendee. - 19 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 65: 21 No 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 66: State whether the defendant received a copy or copies of the Industrial Hygiene Digest published monthly by the IHF and state the date of initial receipt of such publication. // 28 // -38- ( 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 66: 2 No. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 67: * Please state whether the defendant ever requested * officials at the IHF to: *o \ ry&|J _ D^ ^ l f|JL a) Perform a search of the medical literature to determine whether any scientists or doctors were reporting cases of insulation workers with asbestosis and/or lung cancer or discussing the potential hazards incident to use of asbestos containing insulation products. b) Perform any studies or research into potential health hazards incident to the use of asbestos containing insulation products. c) Review governmental publications of Great Britian toward the end of determining whether any research was being conducted by the British Government into any potential health hazards incident to the use of f insulation products contain ing asbestos. d) Review governmental publications of Great Britain to determine whether the Chief Inspector of Factories or any other British Government agency had issued any regulations or published any findings relative to potential health hazards incident to the use of insulation products containing asbestos. // -39- ( 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 67: 2 Objection: Neither relevant to the subject matter of 3 this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 4 admissible evidence; overly broad as to time and place; burden- * 5 some;* oppressive. Without waiving said objections and reserving 6 the right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel 7 further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has no infor 8 mation indicating that it made any such requests. 9 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 68: rn Did the defendant sponsor since 1930 for its employees 12 or distributors any meetings, seminars, conferences, or conven ;13 tions where the subject of occupational health and exposure to 14 asbestos was discussed? 15 *16 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 68: 17 No. 18 19 INTERROGATORY NO. 69: 20 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 68 is in the affir 21 mative, state? 22 a) The date and place of such meeting, seminar, 23 conference, or convention where the subject of 24 occupational health and exposure to asbestos was 25 discussed. 26 b) The name and address of the speaker or discussant. 27 // 28 // -40- ( 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 69: 2 Not applicable. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 70: c * 5 Did the defendant ever warn any labor union representing .6 insulation workers of any potential health hazard from the use of 7 insulation products containing asbestos. 6 9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 70: 10 Not directly. Labor unions that represented insulation 11 workers were warned of potential health hazards through the 12 warning labels placed on all GAF industrial thermal insulation 13 products containing asbestos. It is also believed that certain 14 labor unions were provided with information published or trans 15 mitted by trade associations to which GAF belonged. 16 17 INTERROGATORY NO. 71: 18 If the answer to the preceding Interrogatory is in the 19 affirmative, state: * 20 a) The union. 21 b) How said union was informed. 22 c) The date and place of said information or warning. 23 d) The content and nature of said warning. 24 e) The individual or individuals warned. 25 26 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 71: 27 See response to Interrogatory No. 70, above. 28 // -41- . 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 72: 2 Did the defendant at any time give any advice, publica 3 tion, warning, order, directive, requirement or recommendation, 4 written or oral, including by U. S. Mail, which purported to: 5 a) Advise the plaintiff personally and directly of the 6 (4A Hw 8 i9 possible harmful effects of exposure to, or inhalation of, asbestos or asbestos containing products. b) Advise or recommend to the plaintiff personally and directly as to techniques, methods or equipment which 10 would serve to reduce or guard against such potentially harmful exposure. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 72: Objection: Overly broad as to time and place; vague and 15 ambiguous as to the phrase "which purported to". Without waiving 16 said objections and reserving the right to assert same in the 17 event of a motion to compel further answers, or at trial, GAF 18 responds that other than its warning labels (see response to 19 Interrogatory No. 16), GAF has no record of any direct personal 20 contact with plaintiff. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 73: 23 If your answer to any part of the above Interrogatory 24 No. 72 is in the affirmative, state: 25 a) The nature and exact wording of such advice, 26 warning, recommendation, etc. 27 b) The complete identity of each source of such advice, 28 warning, recommendation, etc. -42- V 1 c) The date, time, place, manner and circumstances when 2 such advice, warning, recommendation, etc., was 3 given. 4 d) The name, business address and telephone number, job 5 title, residence address and telephone number of each 6 and every witness to the plaintiff's reception of such 7 advice, warning, recommendation, etc. 8 e) The name, business address and telephone number, job 9 title, residence address and telephone number of each 10 and every co-worker or similar member of their trade and 11 occupation who also received the same or similar advice, 12 warning, recommendation, etc. 13 14 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 73: 15 See response to Interrogatory No. 72, above. 16 17 INTERROGATORY NO. 74: 18 Have any investigations or other reports been prepared, 19 compiled, submitted or made by or on your behalf in this action? 20 If so, as to each such investigation or report, state fully and 21 in detail: 22 a) The identity of same by date, subject matter, name, 23 address, job title, or capacity of the person or persons 24 to whom addressed or directed. 25 b) The name, address, job title or capacity of the 26 person or persons to whom addressed or directed. 27 // 28 // -43- ( ' 1 c) The name, address and present whereabouts of the 2 person who has present custody or control thereof and 3 the purpose of such preparation. 4 * 5 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 74: . 6 Objection: Attorney-client privilege and attorney work 7 product privilege; burdensome; oppressive; vague; ambiguous. 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 75: 10 Do you, your agents, employees or representatives, know 11 of any statement having been made by the plaintiff or the defen 12 dants pertaining to any circumstances of the illness which is the 13 subject of this lawsuit? 14 15 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 75: 16 Objection: Overly broad; vague; ambiguous; unintel 17 ligible . 18 19 -I-N--T--E--R--R--O--G---A--T--O--R--Y---1N--O---.----7--6-: 20 If the answer to the foregoing interrogatory is in the 21 affirmative, was any statement in writing and, if so, in whose 22 possession is such statement, and when and where it may be 23 inspected by the plaintiff? 24 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 76: 26 See response to Interrogatory No.75, above. 27 // 28 II -44- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 77: 2 If your answer to Interrogatory No. 75 is in the 3 affirmative and any such statement was`oral, when and where was 4 any such statement made, in whose presence was such statement 5 made,' and what was the .substance of such statement? 6 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 77: 8 See objection to Interrogatory No. 75, above. 9 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 78: 11 State the name of all persons who have acted in the 12 capacity as a medical librarian for the defendant since 1930, and 13 give their current address, telephone number and current position 14 with the company. 15 16 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 78: 17 GAT has had no employee with the title or function of 18 medical libriarian or acting in the capacity of medical librarian 19 from the years 1930 to present. 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 79: 22 State whether you subscribed to or received copies of 23 the Asbestos Worker magazine and state the years of subscription 24 or receipt of this magazine. 25 26 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 79: 27 No. .28 // -45- i 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 80: 2 Please state whether you subscribed to the Asbestos K3 magazine and list the inclusive dates of your subscription. 4 * .V 5 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 80: * 6 Yes. Unknown dates. 7 8 INTERROGATORY NO. 81: 9 Please identify all booklets, manuals, journals and 10 publications directed from you to customers and users of all 11 asbestos containing insulation products and the dates said 12 information was forwarded regarding the proper use and 13 application of your asbestos containing insulation products. 14 15 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 81: 16 Objection: Overly broad; vague; ambiguous; neither 17 relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably 18 calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. ' 19 Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert 20 same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or at 21 trial, GAF responds that sales and promotional literature for its 22 industrial thermal insulation products containing asbetos 23 included information regarding the use of said products. These 24 documents are not dated. . 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 82: 27 Please describe and identify all tes-t [sic] and experi 28 ments conducted by you to determine whether or not asbestos -46- ( fcjfcw 4 fUv\ 5 fibers contained within your asbestos containing products would become airborne upon their being applied by asbestos insulation mechanics or helpers. Please state the dates of all tests and expereiments, and the results and conclusions of each test and/,or experiment. lj6c/'5 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY WO. 82: 8 Objection: Neither relevant to the subject matter of 9 this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 10 admissible evidence; overly broad as to time and place; burden 11 some; oppressive; ambiguous as to the term "applied." 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 83: 14 At any time prior to 1964 were any tests or studies 15 conducted or sponsored by you to determine: 0 16 a) The level of dust or fiber concentration incident 17 to: 18 . Sd' 19 (1) Cutting or sawing your insulation products * containing asbestos; 20 (ii) Implacing the product on (1) pipes, 21 (2) boilers; 22 (iii) Tearing down the product during repair and 23 maintenance functions; 24 (iv) Mixing asbestos containing insulating 25 cements. 26 (b) Whether long term (20 years or more) exposure to - . 27 insulation products containing 15% asbestos or less for 28 work periods.less than 8 hours a day, both indoors and -47- 1 outdoors, which resulted in the liberation of asbestos 2 dust or fiber below 5 million particles per cubic foot 3 (mppcf) might cause asbestosis or expose such worker to 4 an increased statistical risk of contracting: 5 (i) Bronchogenic cancer; 6 (ii) Mesothelioma (pleural or peritaneal); 7 (iii) Gastrointestinal cancer. 8 9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 83: 10 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds of 11 relevance, overbreadth as to time and place, burdensome and 12 oppressive. GAF also objects on the grounds that this inter 13 rogatory is vague and ambiguous as to the term "sponsored" and 14 calls for expert medical opinion. Without waiving said objec 15 tions and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a 16 motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds no. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 84: 19 Please identify all texts, articles, publications, 4 20 pamphlets, standards and rules upon which you intend to rely at 21 the time of trial to support your case. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 84: 24 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds of 25 attorney-client privilege and attorney work product privilege. 26 - // 27 // 28 II -48- I t\ 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 85: 2 Please describe and define threshold limit value (TLV) 3 of dust containing asbestos and the application of threshold 4 limit value to the asbestos manufacturing insulation trade. 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 85: 7 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that the recommendations of the American Conference of Governmental 9 and Industrial Hygienists as to threshold limit values are a 10 matter of public record and are readily available to and equally 11 accessible to plaintiff. In addition, GAF objects on the grounds 12 that this interrogatory calls for speculation, conclusion and 13 expert medical opinion. 14 15 INTERROGATORY NO. 86: 16 State whether or not you had an opinion in 1960 as to 17 whether or not the concentration of the airborne asbestos fibers 18 at jobsites at which your asbestos containing insulation products 19 were being applied by asbestos insulation mechanics were within 20 the prescribed threshold limit values for 1960 when said 21 application was being performed and state the basis for your 22 opinion and list all publications upon which you relied in 23 formulating said opinion. 24 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 86: 26 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 27 is vague and ambiguous and calls for speculation, conclusion and 28 expert opinion. -49^ 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 87: 2 State the date and the source from Which you received your first notice and awareness of threshold limit values per taining to the concentration of airborne asbestos fibers. ^0^ . Wo. 6 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 87: GAF does not recall the date at which it first became 8 aware of threshold limit values recommended by the American 9 Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 88: 12 Describe what action was taken by you prior to 1960 to 13 determine whether insulation mechanics who were applying your 14 asbestos containing insulation products were exposed to 15 concentrations below the TLV, and state the date and nature of 16 each action taken by you. 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 88: 19 Objection: Overly broad as to time and place; burden 20 some; oppressive. GAF also objects on the grounds that this 21 interrogatory is vague and ambiguous as to the terms "concen 22 trations" and "action." 23 24 INTERROGATORY NO. 89: i#5'- 26 State your knowledge as to the manner in which your asbestos containing insulation products were cut, sawed, fabri * N">'27 cated and prepared for application upon job sites since 1940 by 28 asbestos insulation mechanics, and also state your knowledge as 1 to the manner in which asbestos containing insulation cement ' 2 manufactured by you was mixed by said asbestos insulation 3 mechanics upon job sites since 1940, particularly as to the 4 creation of dust, in the form of asbestos airborne fibers 5 resulting from preparation and application of said asbestos 6 insulation products and cements 7 8 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY WO. 89: 9 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 10 is overly broad, vague, ambiguous and unintelligible. 11 12 INTERROGATORY NO. 90: uXMfj " Are you aware of articles authored by W. C. Dressen in Public Health Bulletin No. 241 of 1938, establishing threshold limit values for airborne asbestos fibers? If so, when did you 16 become aware? dtfc 17 ^0^18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 90: 19 Yes, <exact date unknown. f 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 91: 22 Please state whether or not you ever obtained any knowl 23. edge concerning the likelihood of asbestos inhalation being 24 hazardous to health, and if so, state when the corporation first ' 25 became aware of the hazardous potential of asbestos and its pro 26 ducts. State how the defendant first obtained this knowledge and v 27 became so aware of said hazards and from what source this infor 28 mation was obtained. * -51- 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY WO. 91: In late 1964, GAF became aware of opinions expressed by certain members of the medical profession, such as Dr. Irving 4 Selikoff, that industrial thermal insulation products containing 5 asbestos were potentially hazardous to the health of insulation 6 workers. These opinions did not relate specifically to the use of GAF's products. 6 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 92: kM 10 Please state whether or not defendant ever maintained a library or collection of medical information pertaining to effects of asbestos upon human health, including its hazardous effects, and if so, where said library or collection was and is located, who the person was who maintained it, and what biblio 15 graphy of medical articles, materials, and other reports were a 16 part of said library on said subject, including journals, 17 publications, reports and all memoranda published and received by 18 you since 1930. 19 4 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 92: 21 No. 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 93: 24 Please state whether or not any governmental agency has ' 25 ever written letters of warning to defendant pertaining to the 26 likelihood of injury to persons being exposed to asbestos and 27 asbestos related materials of the defendant. 28 // -52- { RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 93: Yes. INTERROGATORY NO. 94: i. If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is yes, which agency, when and who possesses a copy of the letter? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 94: OSHA and other governmental bodies. GAF does not and has not maintained any retention system with respect to the information requested by plaintiff. On that basis, GAF is unable to respond in further detail. INTERROGATORY NO. 95: Please annex copies of all such correspondence and notices of governmental agencies pertaining to said warnings. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 95; See response to Interrogatory No. 94, above. INTERROGATORY NO. 96: State whether any substance other than asbestos can produce the restrictive lung disease denominated asbestosis. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 96: GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it calls for speculation, conclusion and expert medical opinion. // -53- / 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 97: 2 State whether asbestos workers, including insulation 3 workers, face a statistically higher risk of contracting lung 4 disease if: i 5 a) They have asbestosis and 6 (i) . Have never smoked; 7 (ii) Have smoked. B b) They do not have asbestosis and 9 (i) Have never smoked; 10 (ii) Have smoked. 11 12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 97: 13 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 14 calls for speculation, conclusion, and expert medical opinion. 15 In addition, GAF objects on the grounds that medical evidence on 16 this point is equally available to plaintiff. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 98: 19 State* whether asbestos workers, including insulation 20 workers face a statistically higher risk of contracting 21 mesothelioma, pleural or peritoneal. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 98: 24 See objection to Interrogatory No. 97 above. 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 99: 27 State whether there is any relationship between 28 cigarette smoking and mesothelioma. -54- 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 99: 2 See objection to Interrogatory No. 97 above. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 100: 5 State your knowledge as to the relationship between the 6 inhalation of asbestos fibers and cancer of the lungs, rectum, 7 stomach and brain. 8 9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 100: 10 See objection to Interrogatory No. 97 above. 11 12 INTERROGATORY NO. 101: 13 State when your knowledge as to the association between inhalation of asbestos fibers and the contraction of cancer and 15 asbestosis was first acquired, and state the source of that 16 information. 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 101: 19 Objection: Vague; ambiguous; assumes fact that an 20 association exists between inhalation of asbestos fibers and the 21 contraction of cancer and asbestosis; argumentative. 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 102: 24 State whether you ever conducted or sponsored any tests 25 relative to the possibility of a relationship between asbestos, 26 exposure and cancer and if so, state when such studies were per 27 formed, by whom they were performed and the results of such 28 ~studies. -55- ( 1 2 S 4 5 6 7 8 9 .10 11 12 oea^13 as-15 a#6 )J|llI' 1178 19 20 fn 21 ^ ' 22 i //^ 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 102: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 103: \ State your knowledge as to the cancer producing capa- bilities of amosite asbestos fibers, crocidolite asbestos fibers, and chrycotile asbestos fibers. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 103: See objection to Interrogatory No. 97 above. . INTERROGATORY NO. 104: Do you subscribe to the United States Public Health Bulletin Service? If your answer is in the affirmative, please state the date when you first so subscribed to the Public Health Service Bulletin. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 104: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 105: Please state the date when you first notified your employees working in your manufacturing plants and factories as to the need to wear and use respirators. pk>i& 24 :0.r' 25 27 26 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 105: With respect to asbestos, employees were notified of the need to wear and use respirators in approximately 1964. // -56- 1 ft Hi 2 $tM s INTERROGATORY NO. 106: Please state the date when yoy first notified asbestos insulation mechanics applying your asbestos insulation products as to the need to wear respirators. to RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 106: 7 Approximately 1964. 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 107: 10 State whether or not defendant has ever published bulle 11 tins, warning its employees concerning the hazards of inhaling 12 asbestos and coming into contact with the products of this 13 defendant containing asbestos. If so, please attach copies of 14 bulletins issued by the defendant to its employees on said 15 subject stating the date and year that said bulletins were 16 If^tiA^ 17 fe^A 18 > 19 distributed to your employees, and the name of the author of said bulletin in the employ of the defendant. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 107: * 20 Objection: Neither relevant to the subject matter of 21 this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 22 admissible evidence; improper request to produce; vague and 23 ambiguous as to the phrase "coming into contact with"; assumes 24 fact that contact with GAF industrial thermal insulation products 25 is hazardous; argumentative. Without waiving said objections and 26 reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to 27 compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it pub - 28 lished bulletins warning employees concerning potential hazards 1 associated with its industrial thermal insulation products con 2 taining asbestos. However, because GAF has no copies of said 3 bulletins, it has no information with regard to the remainder of 4 this interrogatory. 5 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 108: 7 If it is your contention that plaintiff as an asbestos 6 insulation mechanic, knew that the inhalation of asbestos fibers 9 was harmful to his health, please state how plaintiff would have 10 acquired said knowledge. Please state the date plaintiff became 11 aware of the harmful effects of the inhalation of asbestos 12 fibers. 13 14 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 108: 15 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 16 is ambiguous, calls for speculation, and is premature. Without ^,1^ 17 waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in 18 the event of a motion to compel further answers and at the trial of this action*, GAF responds as follows: ZO^ 20 21 GAF has not completed investigation of the facts relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not 22 completed preparation for trial. Investigation and discovery are 23 continuing. Therefore, the following answer is given without 24 prejudice to its right to produce evidence of any subsequently ' 25 discovered facts. At this time, so far as is known, GAF contends 26 that plaintiff, in the course of plaintiff's employment, knew 27 that the inhalation of asbestos fibers was harmful to plaintiff's 28 health. -58- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 109: 2 State whether any officers, agents, servants or 3 employees of the defendant has ever testified before any 4 governmental body regarding the possible harmful effects of rfif' 5 asbestos exposure. If so, state: a) When and where such testimony was given. j 'tjt' '`"o L( b) Summary of said testimony. c) If recorded, and if so, attach a copy to the answer g ^lo to these interrogatories. 11 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 109: 12 Objection: Vague and ambiguous as to the term "govern 13 mental body"; overly broad as to time and place; burdensome; 14 oppressive. Without waiving said objections and reserving the 15 right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further 16 answers or at trial, GAF responds that in so far as it under 17 stands this interrogatory, to the present knowledge of GAF there 18 has been no testimony given at investigative congressional 19 hearings or st(ate legislative hearings.^ 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 110: 22 State the names of any expert witness that you intend to 23 rely upon at the trial of this action, and identify the' subject 24 matter upon which each said expert will testify, his opinions, 25 and the grounds upon which the opinions are based. 26 // 27 // - 28 // -59- t 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 110: 2 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds of 3 attorney work product privilege and attorney-client privilege. 4 GAF also objects on the grounds that this interrogatory and the 5 information sought thereby is premature, improper and calls for 6 speculation. GAF has not completed investigation of the facts 7 relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not 8 completed preparation for trial. Investigation and discovery are 9 continuing. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. Ill: 12 If written documentation in the form of "scientific 13 data" will be introduced into evidence upon a trial of this cause 14 by the defendant, describe each such document, and include its 15 title, author, and the date and identity of any publication in 16 which such data was published. 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. Ill: 19 See response to Interrogatory No. 110, above. 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 112: 22 State the full name, present full address, telephone 23 number of all witnesses who will testify on behalf of the 24 defendant upon a trial of this cause, and identify the subject 25 matter upon which each such witness will testify. 26 27 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 112; 28 See response to Interrogatory No. 110, above. -60- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 113: 2 Describe all written documentation which will be offered 3 upon a trial of this cause on behalf of the defendant against 4 plaintiff. 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 113: 7 See response to Interrogatory No. 110, above. 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 114: 10 Please state if the defendant intends to assert a ii defense of comparative fault. If so, state all facts which the defendant bases its contention that the plaintiff was at fault. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 114: GAF has not completed investigation of the facts ) 16 relating to this case and has not completed discovery. 17 Investigation and discovery are continuing. Therefore the 18 following answer is given without prejudice to its right to 19 produce evidence of any subsequently discovered facts. At this 20 time, so far as is known, GAF answers yes. GAF believes that 21 plaintiff may not have followed instructions from plaintiff's 22 superiors or other sources ar.d may have been careless in the 23 performance of job duties. 24 25 INTERROGATORY NO. 115: 26 If the answer*to the preceding interrogatory is in the 27 affirmative, state in detail those witnesses who may be called to 28 testify in reference to comparative fault. -61- { 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 115.: 2 See response-to Interrogatory No. 110, above. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 116: ; 5 Please state if the defendant intends to assert a 6 defense of incurred and/or assumed risk. If so, state all facts 7 on which the defendant bases its contention that the plaintiff B incurred and/or assumed the risk. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 116; GAF has not completed investigation of the facts relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not completed preparation for trial. Investigation and discovery are continuing. Therefore the following answer is given without prejudice to its right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered facts. At this time, so far as is known, GAF answers that it intends to assert a defense of assumption of risk. GAF 18 believes that plaintiff may have had knowledge of the hazards of 19 plaintiff's employment. 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 117: 22 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 23 affirmative, state in detail those witnesses who may be called to 24 testify in reference to incurred and/or assumed risk. 25 26 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 117: 27 See response to Interrogatory No. 110, above. 28 7/ -62- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 118: 2 Please state if the defendant intends to assert a 3 defense of the Statute of Limitations. If so, state all facts on 4 which the defendant bases its contention that the Statute of = 5 Limitations had run on the plaintiff's claims. 6 7 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 118: 8 GAF has not completed investigation of the facts 9 relating to this case and has not completed discovery. Investi 10 gation and discovery are continuing. Therefore, the following 11 answer is given without prejudice to its right to produce evi 12 dence of any subsequently discovered facts. At this time, so far 13 as is known, GAF intends to assert a defense of the Statute of 14 Limitation. GAF believes plaintiff may have had an informed 15 diagnosis and/or suffered disability more than one year prior to 16 filing this action, and would otherwise be barred. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 119: 19 If the answer to the preceding Interrogatory is in the 20 affirmative, state in detail those witnesses who may be called to 21 testify in reference to Statute of Limitations. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 119: 24 See response to Interrogatory No. 110, above. 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 120: 27 Please state if the defendant intends to assert the 28 defense that there is no causal relationship between plaintiff's -63- 1 injuries and the exposure to asbestos and,asbestos materials. If 2 so, state all facts on which the defendant bases his contention. 3 4 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 120: 5 GAF has not completed investigation of the facts t 6 relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not 7 completed preparation for trial. Investigation and discovery are 8 continuing. Therefore, the following answer is given without 9 prejudice to its right to produce evidence of any subsequently 10 discovered facts. At this time, so far as is known, GAF contends 11 yes. 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 121: 14 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 15 affirmative, state in detail those witnesses who may be called to 16 testify in reference to the lack of causal relationship between 17 plaintiff's injuries and the exposure to asbestos and asbestos 18 materials. 19 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 121: 21 See response to Interrogatory No. 110, above. 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 122: 24 Please state if the defendant intends to assert that it 25 does not manufacture, sell distribute, or supply asbestos insula 26 tion materials to the United States Navy. 27 // 23 // -64- ( 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 122: 2 GAF has not completed investigation of the facts 3 relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not .* completed preparation for trial. Investigation and discovery are fi continuing. Therefore, the following answer is given without 6 prejudice to its right to produce evidence of any subsequently 7 discovered facts. At this time, so far as is known, GAF intends 8 to assert that it has not manufactured thermal insulation pro 9 ducts containing asbestos since September 30, 1975 except for 10 asbestos paper and millboard products which were discontinued, by 11 sale to another company, in 1981, and, therefore, does not sell 12 such materials to the United States Navy. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 123: 15 If the answer to the preceding Interrogatory is in the 16 affirmative, state in detail those witnesses who may be called to 17 testify in reference to said contention. 18 19 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 123: 4f 20 See response to Interrogatory' No. 110, above. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 124: 23 State all distributors and companies to which the defen 24 dant sold or distributed asbestos or asbestos insulation 25 materials for the years 1940-70. 26 // 27 | // 25 // -65- 4 i RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 124: Objection: Overly broad as to time and scope; neither relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has in its possession certain shipping records of its industrial thermal insulation products containing asbestos. The information contained therein is retrievable by reference of year, company shipped to and/or jobsite shipped to. The documents are available for inspection at GAF's principal place of business at a time which is mutually convenient for GAF and for plaintiff's counsel. INTERROGATORY NO. 125: Please state any product within your knowledge which could be or is being used for the same purpose as asbestos containing insulation material, and state when it was determined that said materials could be used as a substitute for asbestos I insulation products. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 125: GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad, burdensome, calls for speculation and requests information equally available to plaintiff. Without waiving said objection, GAF responds that it began producing asbestos - free "Calsilite II" in mid-1970. // ri- -66- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 126: 2 Prior to answering these interrogatories, have you made 3 due and diligent search of all books, records and papers of the 4 defendant and due and diligent inquiry of all agents and 5 employees of the defendant with a view to eliciting all informa 6 tion available in this action. 7 8 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 126: 9 Objection: Neither relevant to the subject matter of 10 this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 11 admissible evidence. 12 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 127: 14 If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the 15 affirmative, state and identify what records of [sic] books and 16 papers were searched and state and identify what agents and 17 employees who were questioned. 18 19 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 127: 4 20 See objection to Interrogatory No. 126, above. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 128: If3 State whether any distributive catalogs or other adver 24 tisement material is disseminated by you. 26 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 128: Cr>. (** Yes. 25 II -67- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 129; 2 Do you advertise by any media whatsoever? 3 4 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 129; 5 Yes. 6 7 INTERROGATORY NO. 130: 8 Have any residents or corporations or other entities of 9 Georgia ordered your products by mail or telephone from 10 California? If so, how many from 1975 through 1976? 11 12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 130: 13 Objection: Neither relevant to the subject matter of 14 this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of 15 admissible evidence. This interrogatory has nothing to do with 16 this case and demonstrates the boilerplate nature of these inter 17 rogatories . 18 19 INTEMRR"OGAT1OR--Y N..O..... 131: 20 State whether you sold any asbestos products to any 21 United States governmental agency, and if so: 22 a) List each such agency. 23 b) The year of each such sale. 24 c) The final government destination of each such 25 product sold. 26 // 27 // 25 // -68- 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 131: 2 Objection: Overly broad; neither relevant to the sub 3 e; Ab ^ 4 5 6 7. ject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to > the discovery of admissible evidence'. Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has in its possession certain shipping records of its indus 8 trial thermal insulation products containing asbestos. The jjerub 9 10 information contained therein is retrievable by reference of year, company shipped to and/or jobsite shipped to. The docu 11 ments are available for inspection at GAF's principal place of 12 business at a time which is mutually convenient for GAF and for 13 plaintiff's counsel. 14 15 INTERROGATORY NO. 132: 16 With reference to these questions, the defendant is 17 identified by its present corporate name. The questions are, 18 however, directed, in addition, to all predecessor corporations 19 whether acquired by merger, stock purchase or otherwise. 20 Answering such questions does not waive any positions the 21 defendant might take with reference to "assets only" defenses. 22 Please state when defendant formed within its corporate structure 23 a group known as "contract unit." As contemplated in these 24 interrogatories, a "contract unit" is a division or group within 25 the corporation which, inter alia, engages in the actual instal- <o CVJ lation 27 !i sites. h 231; // -69- ( i n+ J| ff 10 3 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 132: Objection: Neither relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; vague; ambiguous. Without waiving said ind. 5 objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of 6 a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that 7 it did not engage in the actual installation of industrial ther j)b' 8 mal insulation products containing asbestos at jobsites. 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 133: 11 Please state whether or not any defendant "contract 12 units" were employed at any time in California for the years of 13 1955-1970. 14 15 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 133: 16 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 134: 19 If the answer to interrogatory No. 133 is "yes," please 20 state the dates the defendant "contract units" were in operation, [\ 21 the job sites where they worked, and the names of all employees 22 of defendant employed by the "contract units." 23 24 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 134: 25 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 26 // 27 // - 28 // -70- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 135: z If the answer to Interrogatory No. 133 is "yes," please 3 provide the ful-l name of each employee, the last known address of 4 each employee, and the job title of each employee. 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 135: 7 See response to Interrogatory- No. 132* above. 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 136: 10 On any occasion did defendant in connection with any of 11 its "contract units" ever advise any of the contract unit 12 employees as to the hazards related to the inhalation and/or 13 ingestion of asbestos fibers. 14 15 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 136: 16 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 137: 19 If the answer to interrogatory No. 136 is "yes," please 20 note in detail the job site where such'warnings were provided, 21 the time period of the job, the foreman or superintendent in 22 charge of the job, and the name, last known address, and job 23 title of each employee of said "contract unit." 24 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 137: 26 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 7 // 28 // -71- ( 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 138: 2 State whether respirators approved by the U. S. .Bureau 3 of Mines for pneumoconiosis producing dust were provided to 4 "contract unit" employees and when first provided. . 5 t 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 138: 7 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 8 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 139: 10 State whether respirators for "noxious dusts" are 11 different from respirators approved by the U. S. Bureau of Mines ^2 of pneumoconiosis producing dust. 13 14 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 139: 15 GAF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it 16 is vague and ambiguous and calls for expert opinion and specula 17 tion. 18 19 -I-N--T-E--R--R--O---G--A--T--O--R--Y1--N--O---.---1--4--0- : 20 List the supplier and brand name for all: 21 (a) Noxious dust respirators provided to all "contract 22 unit" employees in California from 1962-1968; 23 (b) Respirators approved by the U. S. Bureau of Mines 24 for pneumoconiosis producing dust to all "contract unit" 25 employees in California for the years 1962-1970; 26 // 27 I // ' 25 'll -72- ( . 1 RESPONSE TO'INTERROGATORY NO. 140: 2 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 141: 5 State whether the following information was ever 6 disseminated to "contract unit" employees and as to each item, 7 state the manner in which it was disseminated, by whom it was B disseminated, when it was disseminated and if disseminated in 9 writing, where a copy of same is located, and; 10 11 (a) That band saw cutting of insulation materials 12 containing asbestos should not be attempted without 13 exhaust ventilation and use of respirators by contract 14 unit employees; 15 (b) That insulation materials containing asbestos 16 should not be wrapped or pounded or cut without general 17 exhaust ventilation or air changes or the wearing of 18 respirators; 19 (c) That old insulation material containing asbestos 20 should not be removed or tom down without the wearing 21 of respirators. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 141: 24 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 25 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 142: 27 State when the first manual of safe practices for the 23 handling and installation of insulation products containing -73- 1 asbestos was disseminated to "contract unit" employees. 2 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 142: 3 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 4 5 INTERROGATORY NO. 143: i e State when the first safety meeting for "contract unit" 7 employees was held in California at which it was revealed to e "contract unit" employees that: 9 10 (a) The inhalation of asbestos dust or fibers might 11 cause asbestosis. 12 (b) The inhalation of asbestos dust or fibers might 13 cause mesothelioma. 14 (c) Insulators faced a higher statistical risk than the 15 general population of contracting (1). lung cancer, (2) 16 mesotheliona, (3) gastrointestinal cancer. 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 143: 19 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. i 20 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 144: 22 State whether "contract unit" employees who were 23 provided respirators received instruction at the time of 24 provision of such respirators relative to: 25 (a) Proper facial fitting. 26 (b) Proper maintenance of the respirator. 27 (c) The necessity for wearing the respirator. 28 (d) The necessity to rotate respirators. -74- 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 144: 2 See response to Interrogatory No'. 132, above. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 145: 5 If answer to interrogatory No. 144 is "yes," please 6 state the first occasion that respirators were provided for 7 "contract unit" employees, the job site, the exact date, the 8 names of the employees on the job, their last known address and 9 job title, and the specific type respirator provided. 10 11 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 145: 12 Not applicable. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 146: 15 If answer to interrogatory No. 138 is "yes," please 16 state whether or not any physical examinations were conducted on 17 defendant "contract unit" employees prior to their being fur 18 nished with respirators. 19 4 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 146: 21 Not applicable. 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 147: 24 Please state whether or not any airborne asbestos dust 25 concentration studies were run in the field where "contract unit" 26 i employees worked. 27 ; // 25 // -75- < 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 147: 2 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 148: ' 5 If the answer to interrogatory No. 147 is "yes," please 6 state the date such first test was run, the place such first test 7 or study was made, the results of said test or study, and the 8 name, last known address and title of person or persons con 9 ducting such test or study. 10 11 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 148: 12 Not applicable. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 149: 15 If the answer to interrogatory No. 148 is "yes," will 16 you without a motion to produce, attach copies of all studies 17 and/or tests run relating to interrogatory No. 148 above? 18 19 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 149: 20 Not applicable. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 150: 23 If your answer to interrogatory No. 149 is "yes," attach 24 copies of such tests or studies, commencing with the first study 25 up to and including the last test or study. 26 27 ! RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 150: 25 Not applicable. t j j i ! -76- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 151: 2 Relative to defendant's "contract units" please state 3 whether or not defendant's "contract unit" employees used 4 routors, saws, sanders, grinders, or any type device used to 5 shape, form, cut, or fabriciate asbes.tos contained [sic] 6 material. 7 8 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 151: 9 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO, 152: 12 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 151 is "yes," please 13 state whether or any occasion any vacuum systems, dust control 14 devices, or watering-down systems, or systems of any kind 15 designed to reduce asbestos dust in the air were at any time used 16 by employees of defendant's "contract units." 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 152: 19 Not applicable. 20 t\ 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 153: 22 If the answer to Interrogatory No. 152 is "yes," please 23 state the first time such devices were used, describing in detail 24 the type devices which were used, the job site upon which such 25 devices were used, the names of all "contract unit" employees on 26 said job, their last known place of address, job title and date 27 of said job. 2S // -77- i  '1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ^ck^13 ; //iMl'rvj14 vpl6c^15 < RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 153: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 154: \% State whether defendant owned or possessed an ownership interest in any asbestos mines. If the answer is "yes," please answer interrogatory numbers 155 through 164. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 154: Yes. INTERROGATORY NO. 155: State whether defendant's mining employees in the course of extracting asbestos from the earth were exposed to dusts other than asbestos dust. 1? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 155: 18 Objection: Vague; ambiguous; neither relevant to the 19 subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead 20 to the discovery of admissible evidence. 21 22 INTERROGATORY NO. 156: 23 Relative to asbestos mines owned by defendant, please Cpn 24 describe in detail the mining operation; that is, whether defentone- 25 dant's asbestos mines are of the "gravel pit" type--that is, ! XLO() 26 ! above ground, where asbestos is mined by surface method; or ^ 27 | whether its asbestos mines are "shaft type" requiring tunnels and jraW23 penetration into the earth to extract asbestos. -78- ( ' 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 156: 2 Above ground. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 157; 35 Relative to asbestos mines-,- please state whether or not on any occasion defendant provided respirators to its asbestos 7 miners. 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 157: . 9 Yes. 10 11 12 ' 13 INTERROGATORY NO. 158: If the answer to interrogatory No. 157 is "yes," please state whether respirators were provided to all mine employees. 14 15 616 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 158: Yes, as we understand this interrogatory. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 159: 19 If answer to interrogatory No. 157 is "no", please state 20 to what mine employee's [sic] respirators were provided, giving 21 job classification. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 159: 24 Not applicable. . 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // jii i j | j j ; -79- t L) 1 il(^5 2 INTERROGATORY NO. 160: Please state the type respirators provided describing in rfipts 5 wi<W 4 detail from the first such respirator provided through the current date if respirators are still used. 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 160: 7 A diligent search has revealed that GAF has no informa 8 tion with respect to this interrogatory. 9 10 11 %. 'ATM INTERROGATORY NO. 161: Please state whether any physical examinations were given to any mine employees prior to their being furnished with * H I3 Y 14 iCU15 4XA^ 16 M^r4A/) respirators of any type. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 161: Objection: Vague; ambiguous. Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion .to compel further answers or at trial and assuming that 19 this interrogatory seeks information with respect to whether or 20 not the results of examinations led to the furnishing of miners 21 with respirators, GAF responds that it does not have any 22 information with respect to such request. 23 ?* fefc 24 INTERROGATORY NO. 162: stadia**! Were any studies or tests done at any defendant mines 26 !i ` n(in&. ! 27 i: ^w#2Si relative to the dangers or hazards of inhalation and/or ingestion of asbestos fibers? // -80- i 1 RESPONSE TO-INTERROGATORY NO. 162: 2 No. ' 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 163: 5 If the answer to interrogatory No. 152 is "yes," please 6 attach copies of all such studies. 7 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 163: 9 Not applicable. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 164: If any medical examination of any mine employees of defendant were [sic] made, did any such medical test reveal that mine employees of defendant were developing asbestosis even 15 though their job was an "outside type job" as contrasted with a job wherein they worked in a confined or limited area? 17 18 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 164: 19 Objection: Vague; ambiguous; improperly calls for 4 20 expert medical opinion. 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 165: State whether defendant belonged to, or was an associate or correspondant [sic] of, the Asbestos Research Council of England. I 1 i RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 165: No. -81- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 166: State whether defendant sold or distributed any asbestos products to English firms or corporations for any year from 1948 : O'str-' 4 to 1963. ' jfatj kb-5 6 7 ^8 9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 166: Objection: Overly broad; vague; ambiguous; neither relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. CerusLo 10 Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert <j^a1. n / 12 13 14 same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has in its possession certain shipping records of its industrial thermal insulation products containing asbestos. The information contained therein is 15 retrievable by reference of year, company shipped to and/or 16 jobsite shiped to. The documents are available for inspection at 17 GAF's principal place of business at a time which is mutually 18 convenient for GAF and for plaintiff's counsel. 19 I 20 INTERROGATORY NO. 167: 'b | 0^ 22 State whether defendant possessed any ownership interest in any firm or corporation involved in the mining, processing or >!> 23 sale of raw asbestos or insulation products containing asbestos 24 which were domiciled, headquartered or doing business in the 25 British Isles for any year from 1948 to 1963. 26 ' j 27 j RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 167: 25 No. -82- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 168: State whether any such firm or corporation possessed any ownership interest in defendant from 1948 to 1963. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 168: Not applicable. o INTERROGATORY NO. 169: When was the first claim for Workmen's Compensation filed by a "contract unit" employee in which it was alleged that said claimant had contracted: (a) Asbestosis. (b) Lung cancer. (c) Mesothelioma. Por each such claimant, list the date the claim was filed, the claimant's name and the State of filing. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 169: See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 170: State whether the defendant entered into licensing agreements with any British or German concerns which manufactured products containing asbestos. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 170: No. // 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 iAit$ 22 ( INTERROGATORY NO. 171: If the answer to the above question is affirmative, list for the years 1947 to 1964: a) The name of each such British or German concern; b) The year the agreement was entered into and all r years between 1947 and 1964 that it was in effect; c) Describe the type products manufactured by such licensees including: (i) The percent composition of asbestos; (ii) The use of the products; (iii) Whether the products were marketed in the United States. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 171: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 172: State whether the defendant at any time between 1945 and 1970 had an International Division. * RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 172: Yes. i24 ' 25 26 27 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 173: State when the International Division was created and where it was headquartered from its inception. II 11 -84- t 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGAlORY NO. 173: .. The International Division was created in 1972 and was headquartered in New York City. INTERROGATORY NO. 174: ; State whether the defendant had an asbestos fiber divi sion which exported asbestos fibers and, if so, whether such division for the years 1945 to 1960 supplied any British manu facturers of thermal insulation products containing asbestos with any raw asbestos. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 174: Objection: Overly broad as to time and place; burden some; oppressive; neither relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has in its possession certain shipping records of its industrial thermal insulation prbducts containing asbestos. The information con tained therein is retrievable by reference of year, company shipped to and/or jobsite shiped to. The documents are available for inspection at GAF's principal place of business at a time which is mutually convenient for GAF and for plaintiff's coun sel. In addition, GAF no longer owns any asbestos mines. // // // -85- 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 175: 2 State whether defendant sold or distributed any thermal 3 insulation products containing asbestos to any British insulation 4 contractor for the years 1947 to 1960. 5 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 175: 7 See response to Interrogatory No. 174, above. 6 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 176: 10 State whether any defendant's "contract units" performed 11 any contract jobs requiring the use of thermal insulation pro 12 ducts containing asbestos in the British Isles for the years 1947 13 to 1960 and specify the year and location of any such job. 14 15 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 176: 16 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 177: 19 List4the names and addresses of all insurance carriers 20 which provided, inter alia, Workmen's Compensation coverage for 21 occupational diseases for contract unit employees for each year 22 from 1945 to 1966. 23 24 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 177: 25 See response to Interrogatory No. 132, above. 26 // 27 I // 25 -86- 1 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 178: What was the defendant's gross sales from asbestos con tained [sic] insulation material for each year from 1933 to pre 4 sent? 5 t 6 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 178: 7 Objection: Burdensome; overly broad; neither relevant 8 to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to 9 lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 179: What was defendant's net earnings per year from asbestos contained [sic] insulation materials from 1933 to present? 14 15 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 179: 16 See objection to Interrogatory No. 178, above. 17 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 180: What percent of defendant's total gross sales involved t sales of asbestos contained [sic] insulation materials for each of the years from 1933 through the present? 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 180: 24 See objection to Interrogatory No. 178 above. 25 26 Mt; // 27 i // 25 i // -87- 1 INTERROGATORY HO. 181: What percent of defendant's total net earnings involved sales of asbestos contained.[sic] insulation materials for each of the years from 1933 through present? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 181: See objection to Interrogatory No. 178, above. INTERROGATORY NO. 182: What was defendant's total net earnings per year from 1933 to present? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 182: See objection to Interrogatory No. 178 above. INTERROGATORY NO. 183: Have you or any of your subsidiaries, or any distributor for you or any of your subsidiaries, ever sold asbestos or asbestos-containing products to any shipping company or other 4 operator of merchant vessels? If so, state the name and address of each such shipping company or operator of merchant vessels, and the date upon which such sale was made. 26 l 27 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 183: Objection: Overly broad as to time and place; burden some; oppressive; neither relevant to the subject matter of this action nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said objections and -88- ( 1 reserving the right to assert same in the event of a motion to 2 compel further answers or at trial, GAF responds that it has in 3 its possession certain shipping records of its industrial thermal \ 4 insulation products containing asbestos. The information con 5 tained therein is retrievable by reference of year, company 6 shipped to and/or jobsite shiped to. The documents are available 7 for inspection at GAF's principal place of business at a time 8 which is mutually convenient for GAF and for plaintiff's counsel. 9 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 184: 11 If you have never sold or otherwise distributed asbestos 12 or asbestos containing products to any shipping company or other 13 operator of merchant vessels, do you have any knowledge that 14 asbestos or asbestos containing products manufactured by you or 15 any of your subsidiaries have ever been utilized on merchant 16 ships? If so, state how such knowledge was acquired, and the 17 name and address of each such shipping company or operator of 18 merchant vessels. 19 20 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 184: * 21 See response to Interrogatory No. 183, above. Without 22 waiving said objections and reserving the right to assert same in 23 // 24 // 25 " i 26 ! // i 27 ! // 28 -89- i. ( ' 1 the event of a motion to compel further answers or at trial, GAF 2 responds as follows: No. 3 4 DATED: June 1. 1982. 5 6 PAUL, HASTINGS-, JANOFSKY & . WALKER 7 0 8 By Douglas C. Conroy 9 Attorneys for Defendant GAF CORPORATION 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 25 -90- I Companies which insure GAF include but are not limited to the following: THE AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY AGRIPPINA RUCKVER51CHERUNGS, AXTIENGESELLESCHART AIU INSURANCE COMPANY ALBA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. ALLIANZ INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. AMERICAN CENTENNIAL INSURANCE COMPANY AMERICAN EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANY AMERICAN RE-INSURANCE COMPANY ANDREW WEIR INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. ASSICURAZIONI GENERALI SPA RALOISE FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. BEACON FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. BELLEFONTE INSURANCE COMPANY BERCANUS INSURANCE COMPANY BERMUDA FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY BIRMINGHAM BRITISH NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY BRYANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. CNA REINSURANCE OF LONDON, LTD. CALIFORNIA UNION INSURANCE COMPANY CITY INSURANCE COMPANY COLUMBIA CASUALTY COMPANY EXHIBIT "A' I COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY COMPAGNIE D`ASSURANCES MARITIMES AERIENNES ET TERRESTRES COMPAGNIE EUROPEENE D'ASSURANCES INDUSTRIELLES S.A. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY * DART INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. ** DOMINION INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. THE DRAKE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. EDINBURGH ASSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. EL PASO INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY EMPLOYER'S MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY EMPLOYER'S REINSURANCE CORPORATION ENGLISH AND AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. ESIS EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. FIDELIDADE INSURANCE COMPANY OF LISBON FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY FIRST STATE INSURANCE COMPANY FOLKSAM INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY (U.K.) LTD. GENERAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY GREAT ATLANTIC INSURANCE COMPANY THE HOME INDEMNITY COMPANY THE HOME INSURANCE COMPANY IDEAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA 2 { INSCO, LTD. INTEGRITY INSURANCE COMPANY LESLIE ERIC KEMP LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY LLOYDS OF LONDON LONDON & EDINBURGH INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. LONDON & OVERSEAS INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. LOUISVILLE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY MENTOR INSURANCE COMPANY (U.K.) MIDLAND INSURANCE COMPANY MINSTER INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. MISSION INSURANCE COMPANY MUTUAL REINSURANCE COMPANY NATIONAL CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. NORTH ATLANTIC INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. NORTHBROOK EXCESS & SURPLUS INSURANCE COMPANY THE NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY NORTH STAR REINSURANCE CORPORATION THE ORION INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. PACIFIC & GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA PRUDENTIAL REINSURANCE COMPANY THE RIVER PLATE REINSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. RIVER THAMES INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. 3 f ST. HELEN'S INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. ST. KATHERINE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. SCAN REINSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. SCOTTISH LION INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. SOVEREIGN MARINE & GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD SPHERE INSURANCE COMPANY STOREBRAND INSURANCE COMPANY (U.K.) STRONGHOLD INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. SWISS UNION GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. TAISHO MARINE & FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY (U.K.) LTD TOKIO MARINE & FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY (U.K.) LTD. TRANSAMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY TRANSIT CASUALTY COMPANY TUREGUM INSURANCE COMPANY UNDERWRITERS'AT LLOYD'S OF LONDON P.J.F. GREEN R.A. JACKSON J.E. GREEN W.B. ROUSE R.J.M. MERRETT H.G. HILL L.R. DREW P.E.J. CAMERON-WEBB L'UNION ATLANTIQUE D'ASSURANCES, S.A. UNITED STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY WALBROOK INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. 4 "WINTERTHUR" SWISS INSURANCE COMPANY WORLD AUXILIARY INSURANCE CORPORATION, LTD. YASUDA FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY (U.K.) LTD. ( 1 2 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) -SS 3 COUNTY OF NEW YORK) AFFIDAVIT 4 5 6 7 PATRICIA CORBUTT, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 8 I am an Assistant Secretary of GAF Corporation, which is a 9 defendant in the case of Robert Buzzard, Jr. versus Johns10 Manville Corporation, etc., et al., Los Angeles Superior Cotart, 11 Case Number C 295 122 and related cases. 12 13 I am authorized by GAF Corporation to make this 14 affidavit. I have read the foregoing Responses of Defendant 15 GAF Corporation to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories 16 dated June 1. 1982. 17 18 To the best of my knowledge, information and belief, 19 the contents qf the answers are true. 20 21 22 1: 23 Patricia Corbutt 24 25: Sworn this 26 day of May , 1982. 2" J v:: ^ O/ ( STATE OF CALIFORNIA. COUNTY OF VERIFICATION r 1, the undersigned, say: I have read the foregoing----------------------------------------------------- .and know its contents. CHECK APPLICABLE PARAGRAPH I am a party to this action. The matters stated in it are true of my own knowledge except as to those matters which are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. \ I-am Dan officer O a partneraf a party to this action, and am authorized to make this verification for and on its behalf, and I make this verification for that reason. I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters stated in it are true. I am one of the attorneys far a party to this action. Such party is absent from the county of aforesaid where such attorneys have their offices, and I make this verification for and on behalf of that party for that reason. I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters stated in it are true. Executed on 19 at California I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (Signature) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF DOCUMENT (other than summons and complaint) Received copy of document described on .19___ (Signature) PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the county of Los Angeles___________________________ State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party-to the within action; my business address is: 555 South Flower Street. Twenty-Second Floor. Los Angeles. California 90071 On June 1, ________ J9___ i served the foregoing document described as RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT GAF CbRPORATION TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGA TORIES______________________________________ nn interested parties in this anion by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at- Los Angeles, California 90071 addressed as follows: Girardi, Keese and Crane Union Bank Square, Suite 1750 445 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, California 90071 (See attached mailing list) Executed nn June 1______________ io82 at Los Angeles__ ________________ California. (check applicable paragraph below) (State) I declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct. (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. HD iTUMT-S EXMOOO TMCSAVt* iMVOCD 3-TT. m<*** o c-nmii ta* fgn C*ra> (Signature) JILL A. FRANKLIN LOS ANGELES DEFENSE COUNSEL Acret & ferrochet 11812 San Vicente Blvd. 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90049 Chase, Rotchford, Drukker & Bogust 606 South Olive St., 22nd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90014 Adams, Duque & Hazeltine P. 0. Box 54795 Los Angeles, CA 90054 Coyle, Marrone & Robinson 3356 Barham Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90068 Anderson, McPharlin & Conners 611 West Sixth St., Suite 1710 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Law Offices of James E. Cusick 4201 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90010 Ball, Hunt, Hart, Brown & Baerwitz 450 North Roxbury Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90010 Daniels, Baratta & Fine 10920 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 1202 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Berg & Phelps 615 South Flower St. Suite 1900 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Law Offices of Joseph Bogan 401 North Brand Boulard Suite 726 Glendale, CA 91203 Breidenbach, Swainston, Yokatis, Crispo 888 West Sixth Street, #1400 P.0. Box 57936 Los Angeles, CA 40017 Brill, Hunt & Debuys 3055 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Buck, Moloney, Nimmo & Ammirato Suite 401, Coast Federal Bldg. 4401 Atlantic Avenue Long Beach, CA 90807 Caplan & Overlander 727 W. Seventh St., Suite 255 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher 515 South Flower Street Los Angeles, CA 90071 Hagenbaugh & Murphy 1301 West Second Street Los Angeles, CA 90026 Haight, Dickson, Brown & Bonesteel Asbestos Unit 2800 28th Street Santa Monica, CA 90405 Hall, Small, Bums & Palumbo 5939 Monterey Road Los Angeles, CA 90042 Hill, Genson, Even, Crandall & Wade 505 Shatto Place Los Angeles, CA 90020 Hillsinger & Costanzo 3055 Wilshire Boulevard 7th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90010 LOS ANGELES DEFENSE COUNSEL Kadison, Ffaelzer, Woodard, Quinn & Rossi 707 Wilshire Boulevard 40th.Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Kean, Engle & Cervenak 3600 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1020 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Kern, Wooley & Maloney 11454 San Vicente Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90049 McHale & Connor 626 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90017 McKay & Byrne 3250 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 603 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Morgan Wenzel & McNicholas 1545 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Kinsella, Boesch, Fujikawa & Towle 1875 Century Park East Suite 1600 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Laura Diane Kotsiris, Esq. 55 Tundra Way Sacramento, CA 95834 Morris, Polich & Purdy 900 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 830 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Murchison & Cummings 680 Wilshire Boulevard Post Office Box 75965 Los Angeles, CA 90075 LaFollette, Johnson, Schroeter & Dehaas 320 North Vermont Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90004 Norby & Brodeur 21535 Hawthorne Boulevard Suite 200 Torrance, CA 90503 Levy, Bivona & Cohen 2049 Century Park East Los Angeles, CA 90067 Nouskaj ian 835^5^*g^on Strtilft Soyth Pasadepa-, CA 91030 Lynberg & Nelson 800 West Sixth Street Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Overton, Lyman & Prince 550 South Flower Fifth Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 MacLachlan, Burford & Stanfield 150 West Fifth Street Suite 103 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Robertson and Frank Eighth Floor 1875 Century Park East Los Angeles, CA 90067 Martin & Stamp 110 Pine Avenue Suite 820 Long Beach, CA 90802 Schell & Delamar 3333 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90010 ( LOS ANGELES DEFENSE COUNSEL Shield & Smith 1200 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Smylie & Selman 1875 Century Park East Suite 1610 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Steams & Nelson 1800 North Highland Avenue Suite 520 Los Angeles, CA 90028 Wells, Barber & Sherlock 1540 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90017 Yusim, Stein & Hangar 8383 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 330 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 4 1 I PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER jj 555 South Flower Street, 22nd Floor 2i Los Angeles, California (213) 489-4000 90071 3 4 5 Attorneys for Defendant GAF CORPORATION 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 11 LAWRENCE KANE, ) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) 13 vs. ) ) 14 JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION, ) a corporation, etc., et al., ) 15 ) Defendants. ) 16 .............................................................. ) NO. C 258940 FURTHER RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT GAF TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES 17 18 TO PLAINTIFF LAWRENCE KANE AND TO HIS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 19 20 IiI Pursuant to Section 2033 of the California Code of * 21 Civil Procedure, defendant GAF Corporation provides further 22 i responses, under oath, to the interrogatories which were pro- s 23 I pounded by plaintiff to said defendant as follows : |' 24 25 ! INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 26 ! If so, please state: 27 (a) The trade name of each such product. 2B 1 (b) The date each such product was altered. i i 1 (c) The nature of the alteration. 2 (d) The reason for the alteration. 3 4 5 96 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Minor changes were made in the composition of calsilite in approximately 1957 to facilitate its manufacturing process. 7 i8 No change was made in the asbestos content or type of said product. In mid-1970 GAF commenced the production of asbestos 9 free calsilite (Calsilite II). 10 11 INTERROGATORY NO. 18: 12 If so, please state: 13 (a) The name and address of each claimant. 14 (b) The date of notice of each claim. 15 (c) A description of the claim, i.e., worker's 16 compensation, products liability, etc. 17 (d) The type of.injuries allegedly sustained. 18 (e) The name and address of each attorney who 19 represents individuals making such claims. 20 (f) The style and court number of each claim * 21 currently pending. 22 (g) The resolution of each claim that has been 23 settled or taken to judgment. 24 25 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO..18: -- -" 26 The first asbestosis action filed against GAF vas in 27 Totter v. Fiberboard, et al. (USDC E.D. Texas; CV 6329; filed 28 July 29, 1969.) i j i ,i ' -2- I i; i INTERROGATORY NO. 19: Do you have any records indicating that any of your products containing asbestos fibers were sold to any of the companies named as co-defendants in this suit? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19: Objection, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said objection, defendant GAF responds as follows: GAP has in its possession shipping records for certain of its industrial thermal insulation products for the years 1967-69 (in part) and for 1970-71 (in whole). These records are indexed by jobsite and not by sales to specific companies. If plaintiff will identify the "contract units" used by co-defendants working at a particular jobsite for which 18 i plaintiff claims injury, GAF will attempt to search the records 19 ; it has available to provide relevant information. 20 21 INTERROGATORY MO. 27: Please describe in detail the type of packages in which defendant has sold asbestos material, listing the dates each type of package was used, a physical description thereof, and a description of any printed material or trademarks that appeared thereon. /// 28 III -3- 1 ESPOUSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 27: 2 Most Ruberoid and GAF thermal insulation products were 3 sold in corrugated cardboard boxes bearing the companvs' 4 respective names or logos. Insulating cement was sold in 5 heavy-duty bags. 6 7 8 IN TERROGATORY NO. 29: 9 If the answer to Interrogatory 4 (mining and milling) I !| ji 10 is yes, state: 11 (a) Where the asbestos was mined and milled. ii '12 (b) How long the defendant has mined and milled 13 asbestos. 14 (c) Whether the defendant has supplied this mined 15 and/br milled asbestos to any of the other 16 defendants since 1950, when these transactions 17 took place; and the dollar and tonnage amount of 16 such sales. 19 (d)4 Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats or 20 directions accompanied the materials referred to 21 in (c) and the date these first appeared. 22 23 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 29: 24 Objection, not reasonably calculated to lead to the 2Sj discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said objection, 26 1 defendant GAF responds as follows: i 27 ! I / / / 28! / / / ' I j i i i -4- 1 GAF Corporation has certain records relating to the 2 information requested from the time period 1965 to 1975. These 3 records are indexed by jobsite and not by purchaser. 4 5 If plaintiff will specify the "contract units" of 6 specific co-defendants working at a jobsite where plaintiffs 7 claim to have been injured, GAF will search said records in an 8 attempt to ascertain relevant information. I 9 10 i I INTERROGATORY NO. 31: -------------------------------------- 11 j If the answer to Interrogatory 3 is yes, state: 12 (a) Where the asbestos or asbestos materials was 13 iI 14 I 15 | manufactured. (b) How long the defendant has manufactured asbestos or asbestos materials. 16 | I 17 j (c) Whether the defendant has supplied this manufactured asbestos orasbestos materials to 16 | any of the other defendants since 1945, when 19 | these transactions took place, where, and the 20 | * compensation paid for the manufactured asbestos 21 ! ! 22 or asbestos materials; (d) Whetherany warnings,cautions, caveats or i j 23 i 24 | directions accomoaniedthe materialsreferred to ` in (c) and the date these first appeared. ! ! \ 25 { l 26 I RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 31: j 27 j Objection, not reasonably calculated to lead to the 28 I; discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving said objection, rI -5- --u I defendant GAT responds as follows: GAF has retained certain records concerning sales of asbestos materials by jobsite. These records are indexed solely by jobsite and not by purchaser. If plaintiff will identify the "contract units" of specific co-defendants working at jobsites where plaintiffs claim to have been injured, GAF will search its records and attempt to ascertain relevant information. INTERROGATORY NO. 34:* * If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the affirmative, state: (a) From vriiere the asbestos or asbestos materials was imported. (b) How long the defendant has imported asbestos and asbestos materials. (c) Whether the defendant has supplied this inported * asbestos or asbestos materials to any of the * other defendants since 1945, when these transactions took place and where. (d) Whether any warnings, cautions, caveats, or directions accompanied the materials referred to in (c) and the date these first appeared. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 34: (c) No direct sales were made. -6- * 1 (d) See answer to Interrogatory No. 15. INTERROGATORY NO. 39: Have any of the other defendants named in the litiga tion ever furnished the defendant answering these Interrogatories with information as to the state of the medical knowledge regarding 0 AmI. 7 the connection between asbestos exposure and the contracting of (u^oM 6 pulmonary diseases including cancer and asbestosis? iev\ cd 10 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 39: n No, with the exception of preparation of pretrial I 12 litigation. 13 14 INTERROGATORY NO. 41: 15 Have any defendants furnished this defendant, or has this 16 defendant furnished any other defendant with the results of any 17 research, tests, medical studies or experiments regarding the 18 state of the medical knowledge as to the connection between 19 asbestos exposure and the contracting of pulmonary diseases, 20 including lunji cancer and asbestosis, sfince 1930? I 21 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 41: 22 No, with the exception of preparation of pretrial 23 litigation. 24 I I II 25 INTERROGATORY NO. 59: 26 Please state whether any of the distributors of your 27 asbestos containing insulation products were provided with any 28 special instructions, oral or written, in regard to utilizing II i i I 1 2 ';iV\4^'0| 3 said products in a manner so as to avoid exposing workers to amounts of dust exceeding threshold limit values. If so, please state: 4 ljjtt'LfrJ.^ 5 6 kjj 7 (a) When these instructions were given. (b) By whom these instructions were given. (c) Were the instructions oral or written. (d) The precise content of the instructions. 8 (e) If the instructions were written, please attach tMb g f)f JdJt a copy of the instructions. XHJlM M-'- [jbbdo ( 10! n! RESPOI.SE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 59:* * 12! Instructions as to use were contained in warning 13 | were placed on the packages containing insulation products i 14 l containing asbestos. See answer to Interrogatory No. 15. 15 ! Instructions were also contained in United States Patent j 16 I No. 3,330,927. l labels is! i As a result of the labels which were placed on 19 j packages containing insulation products containing asbestos, 1 20; GAF did receive some telephone calls with respect to those |* 21 warnings. No record was kept of those calls, the persons 22 placing those calls, the persons responding to those calls, or 23 the subject matter of the inquiries. 24 25 IKIERROGATORY NO. 60: 26 Is the defendant a member of the Asbestos Textile 27 Institute? If so, when did it first become a member and list 28 the years inclusively of membership? -8- \! x j RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 60: pi V^i *wA 4 Arp' Objection, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Overbroad and burdensome. GAF stands by its answer to this interrogatory. 5 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 68: 7 Did the defendant sponsor since 1930 for its employees or distributors any meetings, seminars, conferences, or conven tions where the subject of occupational health and exposure | to asbestos was discussed? n! |i 12 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 68: 13 | No. i( 1154 i INTERROGATORY NO. 79: iU)uA 16 ! State whether you subscribed to or received copies of i 17 | the Asbestos Worker magazine and state the years of subscription 18 !' or receipt of this magazine. fiestas i9! Oorte 20 '} RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 79 21 No. 22 23 INTERROGATORY NO. 93: 24 Please state whether or not any governmental agency has ever written letters of warning to defendant pertaining to the likelihood of injury to persons being exposed to asbestos 27 and asbestos related materials of the defendant. 28 Ill -9- :l 1 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 93: 2 Yes. 3 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 94: 5 If the answer to the preceding Interrogatory is yes, 6 which agency, when and who possesses a copy of the letter? 7 8 i RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 94: ! 9 | Objection, overly broard, vague, and ^1 j waiving said objection, defendant GAF responds ambiguous. as follows: Without & flSMu I j jkA is j bsksi3 i j y\\aj^4^^ j OSHA and other governmental bodies. GAF does not and has not maintained any retention system v 15 with respect to the information reauested by plaintiff. On that 16 j basis, GAF is unable to respond in further detail. 17 / / / 18 III 19 f / / !/// 20 21 / / / 22 iii 23 iii 24 / / / 25 iii 26 iii ' 27 iii !iii 28 -10- INTERROGATORY NO. 102: Ih State whether you ever conducted or sponsored any 3 tests relative to the possibility of a relationship between 4 | asbestos exposure and cancer and if so, state when such studies jcK 51 were performed, by whom they were performed and the results of 6 ! such studies. 7 8 ! RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 102: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 131: State whether you sold any asbestos products to any United States governmental agency and if so: (a) List each such agency. (b) The year of each, such sale. (c) The final government destination of each such product sold. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 131: I Objection, overly broad, not reasonably calculated to * lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Not relevant to the subject matter of the action herein. Without waiving said objection, GAF responds as follows GAF retains records by jobsite and not by purchaser. Ill III III -11- I I INTERROGATORY NO. 160: b Please state the type respirators provided describing in detail from the first such respirator provided through the current date if respirators are still used. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 160: A diligent search has revealed that GAF has no infor mation, with respect to this interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 161: ` Please state whether any physical examinations were given to any mine employees prior to their being furnished with respirators of any type. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO, 161: Objection, vague and ambiguous. Without waiving said objections, assuming that this interrogatory seeks information with respect to whether or not the results of examinations led to the furnishing of miners with respirators, GAF's answer is 4 it does not have any information with respect to that request. INTERROGATORY NO. 162: Were any studies or tests done at any defendant mines relative to the dangers or hazards of inhalation and/or ingestion of asbestos fibers? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 162: 28 !' No. .12. 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 167: 2 State whether defendant possessed any ownership 3 interest in any firm or corporation involved in the mining, 4 processing or sale of raw asbestos or insulation products 5 containing asbestos which were domiciled, headquartered or 6 doing business in the British Isles for any year from 1948 to 7 1963. 6 9 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 167: 10 No. 11 12 INTERROGATORY NO. 174:* * 13 State whether the defendant had an asbestos fiber 14 division which exported asbestos fibers and, if so, whether 15 such division for the years 1945-1960 supplied any British 16 manufacturers of thermal insulation products containing asbestos 17 with any raw asbestos. 18 19 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 174: 20 GAF no longer owns any asbestos mines. Additionally, * 21 GAF does not have any information or records with respect to the 22 information requested in this interrogatory. 23 24 DATED: July 25, 1979 25 PAUL ./HASTINGS, JAN0FS3 26 27 TT Roberts, Attorneys ro: 28 Defendant GAF CORPORATION ii ii i iii -13- i I 1 VERIFICATION 2 3 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) S5 4 COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 5 6 JONATHAN BERGER, being first duly sworn, deposes and 7 says: 8 9 I am an Assistant Secretary of GAF Corporation, a 10 defendant in the above-entitled action, and am duly authorized 11 to verify the foregoing Further Responses to Interrogatories 12 propounded by plaintiff to defendant on behalf of defendant GAF 13 Corporation. I have read the foregoing Further Responses to 14 Interrogatories and know the contents thereof. I am informed 15 and believe, and based upon such information and belief state, 16 that the matters stated therein are true. 17 18 19 20 21 22 Subscribed and Sworn to before me 23 this /(^ day of July, 1979. 24 25 Notary Public m and for Said 26 County and State 27 DOROTHY FASS Notary Public. State Of New York No. 2*-01 FA4682123 28 in Kings County Commission pires Ma*ch 30,19SD ii i  [ stateofcalifornia.county of VERIFICATION I. the undersigned, say: I have read the foregoing. and know it< con .is. B CHECK APPLICABLE PARAGRAPH I am a party to this action. The matters stated in it are true of my ow n knowledge except as to those matters w hie; are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. I am Dan officer Da partner________ ______ Daof_____________________ a party to this action, and am authorized to make this verification for and on its behalf, and I make this verifitcitior: for that reason. I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters staled in it are tree. I am one of the attorneys for______________________________________________________________________________ a party to this action. Such party is absent from the county of aforesaid where such attorneys have their offices, and 1 rake this verification for and on behalf of that party for that reason. 1 am informed and believe and on that ground a egt that the matters staled in it are true. Executed on:______________________________ 19_____ atCafifc-ria.. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. (Signature) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF DOCUMENT (other than summons and complaint) Received copy of document described as________________________________________________________ on 19___ . (Signature) PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the county ofLos AngelesState 0f California.. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action: my business address is: 555 South Flower Street. 22nd Floor. Los Angeles, CA 90071 OnJuly 2519 79 ] served the foregoing document described as FURTHERS SPOUSES OF DEFENDANT GAF TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES_______________________ _____________________________________________ ,,n THE INTERESTED PARTIES in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid in the Ur. tec States mail at:Los Angeles , California, addressed as follows: SEE ATTACHED LIST. 0 Executed on. July 25 79 19____at. Los Angeles (check applicable paragraph below) (State) I declare under penally of perjury that the above is true and correct. .. CJii':rr.:. (Federal) l declare that 1 am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the ser.-.c: made ^--jP iMr s uanorn tmcsxvch imvised j-n> NM * CaMorW* but* O' Count) (Siiggnau^eT Colleen J. Senart ANDERSON, McHALE & CONNOR Attn.: Janies Tillioran, Esq. 626 Wilshire Blvd.,`Ste. 500 Los Angeles, CA 90017 BOLTON HIKER & DUNN Attn.: Ralph Hener, Esq. 900 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90017 BREIDEN3ACH, SWAINSTON, YOKAITIS & CRISPO Attn.: Janes Van Dan, Esq. 668 West Sixth Street, Ste. 1400 Los Angeles, CA 90017 BRILL, HUNT, DeBUYS & BURBY Attn.: Edward DeBuys, Esa. 3055 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. *1000 Los Angeles, CA 90010 BUCK, KOLONY, NIKM0 & ANMIRATO Attn.: Robert Buck, Esq. 100 East Ocean Blvd., Ste. 620 Long Beach, CA 90802 CARLS TROEM & SANFORD Attn.: Charles Carlstroem, Esq. 6006 Wilshire Blvd. , Ste. 204 Los Angeles, CA. 90036 CHASE, ROTCKFORD, DRUKKER & BOGUST Attn.: Henry E. Kappler, Esq. 606 South Olive St.*, *22nd FI. Los Angeles, CA 90014 COYLE, KARRONE & ROBINSON Attn.: Richard B. Coyle, Esq. 3356 Barhan Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90068 JANES E. CUSICK A.ttn.: Joseph A. Nicassio, Esq. 4201 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90010 GILLILAND, ROBERSON & NOSER Attn.: Willian Roberscn, Esq. 606 South Olive St., Ste. 919 Los Angeles, CA 90014 HAIGHT, DICKSON, BROWN & BONESTEEL Attn.: Fulton Haight, Esq. April Haskell, Esq. 815 Moraga Drive Los Angeles, CA 90049 HALL, LINDEMAN, SMALL, BURNS 6 COLOMBO 3600 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1800 Los Angeles, CA 90010 HILLSIKGER & CONSTANZO A.ttn. : John Cons tan zo, Esq. 3345 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90010 LaFOLLETTE, JOHNSON & SCHR0E7ER Attn.: John T. LaFollette, Esq. 320 North Vermont Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90004 MARTIN & STAMP A.ttn.: Lloyd V. Stamp, Esq. 110 Pine Avenue, Ste. 820 Long Beach, CA 90802 . KcCUTCHEON, BLACK, VERLEGER & SHEA Attn.: Robert Wrede, Esq. 3435 Wilshire Blvd., 30th FI. Los Angeles, CA 90010 McKAY, BYRNE & UDKOVICH Attn.: John P. McKay 3250 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. Los Angeles, CA 90010 603 ' MORGAN, WENZEL & McNICHOLAS Attn.: John P. McNicholas 1545 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 800 Los Angeles, CA 90017 MORRIS & POLICH A.ttn.: Douglas Purdy, Esq. 900 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 430 Los Angeles, CA 90017 N0R5Y & BRODEUR A.ttn. : John W. Norby 21535 Hawthorne Blvd., Torrance, CA 90503 Ste. 200 PATTERSON, RITNER & 1 KWOOD Atm.: Tom Mulligan, Esq. 1543 West Olympic Blvd., Ste. 2000 Los Angeles, CA 90503 SCHELL & DELAMER Attn.: Fred B. Belanger, Esq. 1200 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90017 SHIELD & SMITH Attn.: Richard B. Castle, Esq. 1200 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 400 Los Angeles, CA 90017 STEARNS & NELSON Attn.: Bruce Nelson, Esq. 1800 North Highland Ave., Ste. Los Angeles, CA 90028 520 WATERS, McCLUSKEY & CORCORAN Attn.: Joseph Bogan, Esq. Roosevelt Building, Ste. 1155 727 West Seventh Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 LAW OFFICE OF VIRGIL WELLS Attn.: Robert Sherlock, Esq. 1540 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90017 YUSIM, CASSIDY, STEIN & HANGER Attn. : Andrew Stein, Esq. 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 330 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 VOORHIES, GREENE, O'REILLY, AGNEW & BROILLET Attn.: Aaron H. Simon, Esq. 1122 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90017