Document 7OQx3Mo3dw5Xdeme9JYJ1pdnE

IK THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF USE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OP MISSOURI. > MARCH TERM, 1936. L. C. KELSEY, Plaintiff, ) ) ) 8. ETEHKIT, INC., STERN IT MILLS, THE RUBEROID COMPANY, corporation*, ftsd PAUL BEESON, ) ) ) ) ) 'No. 11322 Dir. No. 2 Defendants. ) STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL. All of the matters and things In controversy In the above entitled oause having been_adjusted, oomprooieed and finally eettled, it is hereby stipulated and agreed, by and between the above named plaintiff and defendants Eternit, Inc., The Ruberoid Company and Paul Beoson, that this cause shall be dismissed with prejudice to any other or future aotion on aeooxmt of the matters and things contained and set Torth in plaintiff's petition, and that Court .costa shall be paid by defendants Eternit, Inc., and The Ruberoid Company. Witness our hands, at St. Louis, Missouri, thiej^day of June, 1935, GAF 22376 GAF 22377 IK THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF E -EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MO. MARCH TERM. 1S35, \ n il GAF 22378 y ~ - ]J .............. r............. f^ o rc GAF 22379 xr ! Tf*30i*Kl )x gg cm car se. lows ) IK X/tlS CIRC*. If COVftt VVIUIU A.li) FCJ: T-.;i C.I i-V CK r ST. LOV1S, STA'Ii cy LT.^O\P FJ-3KUAJS: I&SU - 1968 X. C. JCBLSEf, Plaintiff, T, BtJSRHIS, IBC., a oorpcratlon, STK8SJT KZU8, a oorporatlon, m RDBBROID OOUPAKT, a corporation, 9815 Elrerrlaw Erlvo, and PAUL BXSSOtf. aa Individual, 5338 Oocdfallow ATanna, JDofandante. 1 mxo Plaintiff itataa that tba dafandante, Ktarnit, Ine, B tarnit Ullla, and St* Kuberold Conpany ara now and ssra at all th.a tins* haralnaftar oantloneiotf&poratlona, doing bualnass in.tha City of 3t. Louis, st&ta of tilaaonrl and lloanaad to |p buelnaaj as corporations ...la the Stats of Hiasouri, aiiii liabia to aua vindar tha lewd .of said atata, and to ho tnod nndar tha Imb of..aald atato.i.44ftj()ga_dafandant , Paul Baa*on, waa at all tha ttaas harala aantionad, an Individual, ' " ohergsd by tha dafaadant oorpomtlona, partloularlythe BubsroId ' Coayany, with tha following duties as thalraaployss j'~ia4 that ha entsrsd Into tha parforotasoa of aald dntlsa in obsdlsnss to tha ordsrs -1 of aald corporate defeS^as^a, <1) of determining under wbat conditions plaintiff ahauld'ha provided with an adequate and approTad raaplrator, in ordar to protest hin teem tha lust haroln nantionad, 18) of ictormlnlng eqalpftac, and placing la operation dust ventilating equipaent, dust raaovsre, and other d^at removal equipment La aald plant for the purpoas of reaovlag tha duat from tha atnoaphere, whloh -- plaintiff me required ta hraatha la tha performance of lilt duttas for ,. said defendant eerporatlearn, IS) of waning plaintiff of tha hangar of^N< working m an 'Atmosphere charged with duat containing th/ Iforeaent local ~L "~ ....... i L_ !. -J fe gAF 22380 ; :v r r. i v. : . i ) . v if. sill t, Will; tic:-- <<, s 'll ' ' vl f.'v.or^t ed .n'! . c\''? l*1 i..: r r _ 11" i ' ' v.->s enployci i" ..'Vl ci- t .. sst-1 Cc Cor.i-'fi"". " . > . ;; Tetrvnry 19ZS to the 8,-t\ 0-.y Of Plaintiff f. i-t- r state.* that nlfl trf- o&v.t* "i- : - U the H'*s lerj!r.iftsr f .v.'.tioi'.cd el i a ir-.-lo c;- . .* ' i i-i \r\ subjeoted their 5t>loyc?i end plnir.t iff to tVo ftrr*v r .' iiVel itool of ooctreoklns s.n .lllr-io? or aireaa* ineldar.t art rtrJi . or procso to~v;it the iv-wfacture, pri.sJil".;*, a'vvii.;.*, !;: s*.., e!..iiv a* lecilni into box ena of asbtstoi, vert'tvAU tc, :,ii;e*te, eliuilm-a, s Diet rr.d ethos asbestos f.rcfluctn ; t s.1 V t t*<-i/;: c;i l li t: J cjsr' tiir.s tiMtrateft ml Ti-oOlacoa gx-eat faf.r.tnitt n' lr.ji.rJ i-cieorvu* 1 end K.xlc-'io fiwjt, and that in sail pleat and c.lU end in vil o'.oi.t U:j pi t ees there ylnUitlff w.ir required to vork, th et.-reyi.oio tfj.e charged with a alnnle, hot, drjr dvat, oa^ablo of being breathed into t'r.o els sacs of the lr.pj.e t'rivrh the note, threat end ren-irstory eyeten, and th.t cold dust Caused ehcnieal steelier r.r.d fitchinleal irritation of the soeplrotory trset Rr:l ).'iV"s end yrcduoel the di**5e*s "yKrtillrr-to-.^------- *the-inhalation of said Cust^ natiPly dust hroncMtla, peribronchitis, pr.euaoconi o 1 s, esieeToirsy palot^ejt-^ihsp^ljTjRnV^thW-1o*bs~ raspiratory dieeteot, ell of trhiSh'Vfpo' peouli?r to-the.inhaletIon of " deal generated i. tredteed .in the afereKoutloned.^flijrs.ticr.a, end that aid trade or rroccoe wan cs.teeislly dangerous to the Henlth of ''piainlfc'fjf; am provided V 3e:tlan 1S6D3 of the hqitecd dtatvtee of Ml me Purl, !' Plaintiff for hie oj-a uf 'aetlon otate* that diirtng aXf'vf-'-- *<4 - hie emloyaeat ty the defendants re woe ordered and direoted to work la lte plant end nill in the leading of box 0are aid in around oruahere, maea, eflgere, trlanera; and other emehlnee * hi oil genemtsd and jra^g.^ great qeaetitiee of the aforeaontioned duet) that lie .vae required to eleae the Bill nith a houee brooB aad tc sweep .maid- dni t, ao required te eweep pile# of chlr.flee with a broom, rhlch require! great uuantitiee GAF 22381 r It" V t UJ li t -i, fj.;, t'l , Ir. . iI te , iU'-. iv.v. V,,.- . .. I-fit **, ll i-.? .*. MttCJtlrcsj ti" ' >J:t ..I'- 1 ymtl 15.: rut! .: v V.tci. liv: tr. i U.;-'. . .!*-.* s t'.o o..` t;mc-.i-!.' f rtc^vatd r. ;.-;.ir5T.o.j-y iJ o*:it t. ' Halvt ir. th-s fwtjraylns fw; * : t;-# i w. *>, rcs4-.>riiw c.-.-; ;- .. . rs.fc.'f rt t? lu t'r.i t&eat i;.s ts irijx,- ~ i , r -' . i. > pi r.rttlo J.cte* Jo.-.b r.' d t I a si.'-c *. i.-- *\ . S'. >.ccV t1J. CevolOf.Miiii -rf tutor V :r, r.\r of. r or iik.".s,s3j t; at im If s'. v>f J-. st, \;.t : *- i Httllty, fca! dltfjijclrV Is tecf-tj,'..-..., s\ ..i >'id ->vr..t.;i j.frrenrr vio.VSi^iV-i/ lf.Jcfr.tl! t,j:* C.'.*\; tr.S'. ivlilf r.s.t fllff-f'.tj t-` c t fl#. U.ttfCs* t t IfVvt r:-<?uL v oj' t!;c lstaiotlen of astdLtivo i.rtj.jtogit;, + , -iwcnss/ I'tVfj jii. of eiitV. < nfr ,vWWa j>*3ull<ur .to oat AN. L J GAF r -4 . violation of the 1m of the State of Uis'io'.rl L'-u v. \n \'>A\ force and affaot tains h*viced Statutes ol* . icseurl, 191, Static n 19234 tains os followsi FRKV-SFYIOW OP SUOZS, SUSY ACT OAS -- Bvery parson, firm or corporation using any polishing uvoel or machine of any oharaoter which generates duet, atook* or poliorooa gases In Its operation, shall provide sash and every anoh wheel or uaohtne with a hood which shall to eomnootsd with a blower or suction fan of sufflolont power to oarry off said dost, stroke and gases and prevent lta Inhalation by those employed atout said wheal or maehine ***." S, Chat the defendants la the eonduot of their said trade or proooss operated various hoppers, saws, and sanders, which, while being operated, eeused vast quantities of dust to to emitted into the atmosphere and did negligently and earaleasly fall and colt to provide eaeh and every said machine with a hood or covering, and an adequate and effioleat apparatus or other proper devices for ths purpose of drawing .away from, the employees noxious, poisonous or injurious dusts _ Snd pyevesting the employees frcm oomlng into unnooossary oontaot therewith, andnesllgently failed to provide covers or dampen said conveyors or receptacles, and negligently did fall to remote from the floor of s&id ^pXaat Vhe' 4aSt~aS:StflKaTl'T>f 'Y'tfengereiis' lit vitiation of the law of the..State of Hlsaourl, then and there in fhll foroeand effeot, being devised Statutes of ttlecouri ^^929^^ Section 13M2 w1hich is as follows: ........... - aaprsss, chutps, no; to bx pbovxdzd wiih comm. *' All toppers or eontea or slaliar devises used in the ourse of any presses sr aaanfaeture referred te In Isation IMS* Shall be provided with a heed er ''severing and an adequate and' effioleat apparatus or . etaair proper device for the purpose of drawing away from the employes noxious, polaeuoueor injurious dusts, and preventing the employes from oomlng into unnecessary . contact.therewith; and all eonveyanees or reMptaolfrf'-tJ weed forth# transportation about or the atcrags In any i place Where any rush process or manufacture or labor iI referred te IS Seetlow iM la earned es, shall be properly hovered er dampened in amah a way; ae "te proteat i ths health *f the employes, and no refuse if a dangerous character incident te.the work or prooeaa carried on In any such place shall W./allowsd to remain accumulate! on- l the floors there#!. i J OAF 22383 n 3. 't'hat the a.\W --ov't: ar-1 . i.-: noso erggcd In vis .1 uoik which would'. ivi>>eo iiir..- k . o ;..* :-i peculiar to tho work or crocoes oaerJid on there, atA ns. Lis-; tl. 3 of plaintiff 5 ero'lo.v.-'-.artt and fir a long time prior thereto, there h?.i been isanufaeVired and in use apprised and effeotlvo fayIce 3, r.i^ra, er4 jROthofls which when In use, woold provent the dlseis3 efovcsitd; that said approved and effective devlees are at rollows, tc-v.lt: (1) respirators, cask* cod nasties to be worn ty the aatd c;>>l4>-c:a, (S) dust preventing, dust collecting, dust renjvir.^ and dust d'.rvsnSrj rohineryt eppllor.oos and apparatus, (3) wet aass a^d liter nVtachrv.at* to bo plaoed upon dry oawa, (4) natural ventilation, ventilating 0,781cm3, air purifying and ceding apparatus, heat and humidity rodeoing appliance*. Plaintiff furthsr states that dvrlng the tine of his erplbyciont the defendants failed and omitted'to fnrnish all or any of tho above deeoribed approved and effeotlve devices, noans or etetheds fer the proventlon of thV'^klsoaas efcresald, all in violation, of the law of the tttste of lUsscuri, then and therein full feroo and effect being SsetIon 13EC2 of tfcs Borises Statutes of-tho Stats of Xtiaeo'ir i, 1929, "whichTs as follows: EKiTCle* ?0 PBOYIM PHCtECIIiSK ?SP1( BISEISSS. That ^ every employer of labor''In this stats engaged la . ......oowy.tryi aw wer*. _>t4p. .or pyjiMM hjsh wL prounserany llinasa or disease peculiar to the work . .. . or process .oajrried' on,'-6YM*hXSK~irnbJests' the-employee Vs' the danger of llloosa or disease insl.dsnt to suoh work, trade or proses. to which saployses are exposed, ahall, for the protection of all employees engaged la sueh work, . trade, or proeoaa, adopt and provide approved and effeetlve davlaes, aeana and aathods for -the-preveatlon, of sueh Industrial or -oeeupational diseases as are incident to ~ ^mnfc work, t*ade or process. < That the defendants negligently ordered and dlreetsd f-f.'i- _ plaintiff to work In and about its plant where tho atmosphere was fully eharged with fine, minute, dry, hot particles of duat,.eapabls of entering the air saoe of the lungs and negligently`felled to ^revide tr-* ror and plaee at the. dlaj.csal of its enplo/e3, sd-aucte and approved respirators, without cost to the employees, -siien 3aii`du9t In eh 1 eh # * plaintiff was rsyiUwl to cork was box lews, p.-.lno r.r;8 sx.d ltijurlr.ua to tsh -IL . 1 < r.*. .i- . " Vi! -I GAF 22384 r -fi f th* health, when breathed Into tha body, ('ll ;rs .- o-. .'.iV ; if the Stata of Wloaourl, thon *?>d there ir. full. ftvoc r-.nl sti'.-jl, ' So at ion 13264 of the noviijed Statutes of the otate of . I o-;< v,4 , which is as follows! "5KPJ.0Y33 *0 W KUfcOSHH) m CMK.v.;-J - ias3MKVi.'*:3 TO BS USSB WillIE ax V/OKK -- Every f-fcf le,vi- lr. t-.la state to whloh this Sirtlelo applies chv.ll proviso for end pluoe at t):c disposal of the employes so c:v;c~ol. and shall paint sin In good condition and .ili'-.-tt coot to ths etfployss, working clothes to be Kept e.t uacd exclusively by such enployea ~-htla at -otic. arJ oil employes therein shall ho required at all tines while they are at work to uee and wear noh clotH.r.:; and in all proeesees of snhiifaoture or labor referred to lit thin seetlon which ere productive of noxious or poisonous dusts, adequate end approved respirators shall be furnished and maintained by Aha enployar in cool conditio1, and without oost to the employee, end such enployas shell use such respirators at sill titles while etyajed in any osork productive of noxious or poisonous dusts. 0, -That the sold work end process which defendants sore engaged Jn was a tro.de or proeese which ess especially dangerous to the health of plaintiff ns provided by Section 13B&3 of the nerlsed --.Jtatutes of Itlseourt, and defendants negligently failed during plaintiffs ief ...... ... employment to requirVhla to be.examined by a competent, licensed, reputable phyeia Jen aa often as oneo eTery calendar uodth' for--the-. . purpoW-Qf -acoortelalng if there'. exletcb-dn ylaiutiff. any Industrial or oeetpatlonal dlsease'`W"lllheea*p5'fcllar or lnoideat to' the oharaotar ef the work In whloh. plaintiff m engaged, all In violation of the law O. . of the State of Hlaeouri, being devised statutes of meacnrl^jPap,, Beetlon 1AM6which, is la words and figures as follows: > - vaenons to at jxikdo hohxhlt bt rarsicux. every employer engaged la carrying on any proses* or aaasfaetur# re&v*d to la section.13669 shall, da : oftea M enee every calendar mate, eaua* all ^ asleyes who ecae late-direct eaietaet with the' '.pbltejMwa agenclee Or laJCwrleaa KMim referred*??*.) laVaeetlee ISSN ta b* examined by a.seapeisat, Iteeaset-and-reputable physielaa for the purpose of M**rtelslag If .there exleva la day eupleya Any ialuatrial' *r occupational disease or illness or any diecaaa or lllsasa due or lnoldent to the -oharaoter. of the work la which employ# la engaged.* ' v. d That the said work and proeesa la-which defendants were engaged was a work or proeeay wbleb was especially dangerous to tho ?>-L 1 GAF 22385 1- ' *A. : /4* ! \ i. health of ploli>t Iff, In tVat there \r\x c. -r < .' . l .r i r____ qusutlties ef Injurious, obnoxious end r.v!scro< .< ;t o: tl Ini*:-; aegneslun allloatc, allloi end otr.tr subi^rPcca o-i iofw.lvi'? r.jOt .illy failed to post in conspicuous pluses In its sail.plur.t t.';orc 5uc>i -..Ji'k n and prceess wcs carried ot:, appropriate notlo3 c-f the Ino.r. duller to the health of said eaployces, arising Itra the said rorie or process, and simple Instructions as to tha known means of avoiding tv.o Injurious consequences tfceroof, all in violation of the law of the Slats of. i:iatcurl than ant there la full fores and offset being Scot ion IMS* of the Revised btatutes of itltsowr 1, 1929* 7. That tha defendants negligently and ear closely asev.rcl plaintiff that he eptild with reasonable safety, work la Its said plant where groat Quantiles of obnoxious, poisonous asbestos dust uas generated and produood, and which was breathed Into his lungs and . eepablo of entering the air sacs thereof, without danger to hla health wader the olreuf.etaroee aforesaid-?" When the defendants knew, or by the everelse of ordinary care, oo:ld have known that the-inhalation of ellloa dust.was dangerous to the health of plaintiff, and If breathed Into hla luge would cause and permit the developcent of diseases peculiar to r%aa Inhalation of aald'.dust. all of: whloh plaintiff says was directly due '.nnd caused by the eonaurrant negligence of the defendants,.directly ; . prcxinaieljr producing and' oaualhi the develenoent. of plaintiff.. r* lllneas ahii disease aforementioned. ~ . ' ._ fi. That the defendants negligently ordered aaddlreeted ;vbl^hlktif|; tevelsan said Bill and' the floor' tljdreof, and plies of shln^eev therein.*It h aheuse brooa, and to sweep saidduet and to create sald'ddsV '' r* ih .***" iijf* .SOtloh he was ragaired *e Ju4 negligently fnfied -te . di^jjn VnSKiluvt when the defendants, knew,- er by the exercise of r<laary th.lr part,, oealt have kaewa that th'-`- sweeping of said, *us$fy, Wlua'^ewjlaireeo, fait create dust in tie air where plaintiff waa ' *. -- ... , kly^d to weatke, la auah quantities as to be baneful, Injur lone and I,4^d. kaeWi er by the exercise ef ordinary oare, eould have kaW that J^t we practicable and feasible to deepen rtid dnnt with water 1 ''L -J GAF 22386 r rs -e- I cr othenSeans, and thus end thereby prstifTt Via gs:. >r:t K.r, oC si It dusk, there by direotly censing plaintiff's illness i.n-1 dl-'.:*c, Y/BERKSOfcB, plaintiff says hs has lean fianAgsd in the o. i of Thirty Phcusaud Collars ($30,000) for which tun he prays }vi-.. ;r.t against the defendants, tcgsthar with his costs. GAF 22387 rv 2100$! HUT) cus ir.; : r r Cfi V tV i 'i 3:34 GAF 22388 i r tll y* J ; ; *f. r r: i- , . ' I > ;-*M 1 .;*.** ./;?* 10 rtppetr I %-*** if.c v! Ci-rr'i i'-nrv, or. o( Sti.k&f.*, OvtH.Vir'.i tiiti Ar.d Hzt*-*.-. u4 Ihtro toti-4 ,v of. ......._....t.,, a.. ** It ' * ' J ' -r-;: < . V ' ^ M ttt iocth tn :!it ;-ol'tk7\, - J b-'-t voq tT>-. t-4 fV.-f? vi':: * J'fXT I* CC ** V f'l' Jt \-f r*itr <.:* i oi*i l V.* fJV . V jt*-. *. v-Wte-V Mice' ecs* lhl l. Mtrorii Ap***1 feflaQja Stlmil thn.-- r-v.-'trvr-.,; 1: As*OM cit ;. --../j; Hi*. CLr Hr GAF 22389 r r ' r ~i GAF 22390 r WHlrf't I. iMl f;t,.*-(. 11 . (a <Jv<v>: ..< ), v.n- . /f- *<( {-<0 .-hi `I' -itrt *.<.<.f U Jt '/ijc.vr - - ' -y to ;. j i-t111 k - ! I 1 ' th* * Cu'ii1 vii-f f " tW1-4 tQ tfea *U* *- !* ;' tiJ. r`' J t . 1 . ^ 1 lit l'*t 1. t tt, --------p:rv*> \ 1 frrtfcer fi;rs1 ll>l: arlt lr> tho_ .*t. U' 1 'I* t*-* \10.iu 1- it.ii e it*,ni*tiu tv:; ,&C&*A<*#Cj.. ---s^e-c.,.................. .......... (a Cor;v `.tto), IMj. ,.y by e sciy^vf r.M h n : . r 1 ..ui / t c i :r> *.i . . ' i....... * :.? ..Ulf.t, >. b*Jjx;`in sail j'K : 1* : *. ..' : t <!.. . i;.ci-5ot, ho Frralflrnt or other nr; v i... \ i`. itiill 1 it! tr found Iti tho city ot Si. ixbi'v-lu* tv>h: Ur^ cf * * i yj JF By .. rn/ ! j ; | : 1> - &**-:> .-i ti t'-lt/SuttB' (':<* yvil jft uh Vf,tt i> fTOsi^wr tr*> ftfV/ysm.t. frwita* &7~s J' if 6t-* a*"**^** V>1 L GAF 22391 r SJi.TS CIYI tf St. } ) S' ) III tff. CJ8CUI7 *T - F*rV!%v.? fi - I L. C. teUVf, Pil'd iff. *. vriiviiT, i's M-fnti.vi, K7V_~v:T XtllS, il a'-TJCVatlnn, r>rx r.C8S901& OtttMXf, eor.. -ration, kriif t*;w. rfSSOH. no lldlv; vrll. ) i-' Pe'-dMU. ) i. . .'iv. ' l gc-ncs c? g:- r:m kl-ti TO TH AiCVR Kil.Jy VIAISTJ*?, t. C. mS5.T, <"8 hw Arro.iiCTi . w.RTi>.:,P, f??., '* 7i-l nro l.crc'-y r.otji'le.l _tfcat rt?r-i*r.bJ rte `it. Zee., *nJ . k-jVoroJd fejUA/ veill flln In tk* ClrVi't Ce.tri. City of it. L--.'iJ*',, liliinrl, K* thfl rcuoiol 'pottUoa r;.:7JiX fcor.l i.tfito a`;tt;hel, for tho of re noting t*- M lo t'-.o Diitrtet Court of ti.( Ualtod fsr th* Baitern.DjTl!r-n of-ilio shdlsll PUtriot of Itlttcurl. Aui yC1 tr v fartiior roMfird Hit tin llTctKiti vlllj <n 7cniiy, ftirar/ I, U1S, it (ii3 o'alsoV or ti ocn ttnffcf ii Sir; ny V* Uirl, prty (aid : Ciroult CoTrt, City of St. L-uli, Htdo.trl, to ij-prcTO Mil Vor.4 >:1 to e/t tti* ouroty thereof *rl to wlw rtir>l ( ;ry*-i iri Mid' pititIon to Mid Mttriii Cmrt clHW Oditod Stmtoi for trio ft item Cidilon of th* hittrn Jadlelal 01Itriot of Xittoorl. .>' .' Kimi?;.H5.i M j?js htsooid ccutast. By . JillUj q o-fccA. "'I rlnilr XCVorr.oyi. tho otdiiriifWd flnlirtiff l:. tlir iVori ** toroty aefenrarlnlnra that oopy of th* ftm notino, with copy of ootltlm d %Md for romoral thoreis aaatloood, I daly l*rrod apon him thl / dor of .flkruirr, 1(11. /( ----i.. c. rsLsrr ]737Tlit 6&L (V Lr$\ - 1 GAF 22392 r. r t > 'j . & i > li. -ii *t i__ _ i 67AIB CP UJ68cyRl ) 5 68 air op st. LC'Jis ) XX SHI CUMJIf COCK? - PUK-'ARY JiK-. - 1S55. L. C. MiSST, Plaintiff, ) ) } \ $ \ FfiSJdt, ISC., a corporation, WSASlf YILL8, a corporation, ff>H HHfEfiOlD OOfrvSY. a corporation, and PAUL fcBK60S, as Individual, Vo. *1.\;31 Div. to. 1 Defendants., ramies or vroarr, r*:c., asd sac smaoio cowr.Y, cqh?outiovs, for rsiotaj, or ca'iss to united turn ____;, _ DISTRICT cat?. Hoar aoae Yfcsrnit, Ino., and the Rnberold Cocpany, definlar.t* above oanod, and fila tttir petition for the roaml ef the above entitled cause t.V the-Vnlted dtatM^Statrlet Court for the Eastern tlvlilui of the Eastern Judicial District of I'lsiourlonl retpaotrolly ahov~Co tfi* Ctrarb-tha* .tbla .. , nll.MUil aotlun at lair, being a suit-brought by the above neicad plaintiff . against the stove named defAidants to recover Ycr"aUbJti'lnJariaa-*hieh plain tiff olein* in said petition to have fceon esassd by alleged nogllgaroa cn tir part of the above raaed defendant*i that the plaintiff in said cause m at" ' the ti*e ef pit eosanMarst ef said suit end ever slr.ee has born end (till 1 a dtlaee Sad resident of theitete of Xloeourli that Xtemit, lee., whs at the'tlae of the m--iiiemb of said salt end ever etne* has been end still la a corporation organised under the leva of the State of frlasm re, a cltlian end resides* ef..said atatej that She lubereid Company nl at the tlae of the swsaaosmaat ef set* suit and ever sine# has been end still Jo a corporation organised under the lews v>r the State ef rv* Jersey, e eitisea atd resident of sal instate i tliat ttercit Pllle, elleged In jlelntiff' jotltlon to bo e corporation, Is wt POtf ar-i never ba been e 'X*rporation eri-i la not and never has been a le~al e.tlty capable of or being sued end is cerely the/iene 'r' (?) -1- ~1 GAF 22393 of a rJ-rufaot'r1r g plsut of Tie Huborold Civpnny <*ed to 1 vt' ;?ilo:i V> froa other sumifttcturi'g plants of said covpawyi aV. th.U the -'ll.ter <j i Amount In dispute In said cause exceed*, exclusive of loU rri'.fc end ct-ils, the sum or valuo of Three Thousand Dollar* (<d,000,09). T^T petitioners further rto#r to the Co-art that the i*fen<'<,nt l'o il Beeson, who 1* a cltitor. and resident of the i-tate of Ulasouri, ws rt joined In food fnlth *s a party defendant In said ounce, tut was fraudulently joined by the plaintiff as a defendant In eeld cause for the purpose of fraudulently defeating the jurisdiction of the District Court of the United' States In said cause snd for the fraudulent purpose of pre-rentir.g a renoval of this cause to the District' Court of the United Statesi that the allocation* contained in paragraphs numbered 1 to 6, inclusive, iii plaintiff's petition fall to stato fasts constituting a oaiise bf. action against defendant Faul .Reeaj.'i, he cans* SaldPaul .CeeSpprjras not sV'anytime the employer of the . plaintiff ajid'tuph allegatlonlfu^gt>rbe^dthre.sted^oniy against,, plaintiff**' . eaployor tni*Rib.trp andthisnagligenee attsopt^d .to, be alleged under said allegation* .sguiiist taid' Paul.*Be.a*pft ivsuoh * only piklntlff ' siaat*.r..*qd employer op.uldbe liable forj yoUr .. allejattons'bontalr.ed iii. paragraphsnumbered T and 'VVlii playrtixf't'petitlor *ha^ins''tih*t said-^wi^ipdcs^faeioftiVfe'^li/jdefisi^tsi^lWreliv'bdl^ltaptly assuredj^nlittiff that ltd* could with Yeaeqmhia bafoty-'sfo-fc' under the- eondltlbhs. deepribad. en'd'he ^egligonti^*^^*^**1. ani'diTe^ted pidinbtff/to fesepbloah-the'feill and" the floor thet*ef^]wi;th a'hotoee.broom;'.ittS.tri-jbt' condition*.describedJ ,. a_re_ ' AfasVlse ^sjaJd fraudulent'tod Uplaint*iff ' ais'' ww-a-ii*ttJh__o,u_Lt - credible eridenoe to support s-iehol'legation*. >nd they are nads solely for the purpose of atteaptiac" to^S.tate a-. euse of actldn against said Faiil Beeson In m/attempt to. fraudulently prevent a'removal^of this oaa* to the District Court of the United States,- : " '` 'r " _: >'? ; Your tltionsrs further state that the allegations'In plaintiffs ' ' petition to U-,e offoot that lie \r employ od ty all tho dorehdSnts.ve fsl ss t-tf fraudulent} they stto that plaintiff at no tin* v?. w-.plbyed by defendant I Paul Booion yotr notltiovicrs stale tv-.t r < :l t-i-old l\ so-j-ilrod Ihe pls.-it en-i property of Jofc.'-if. it ol'-rntt, T> , utlrr <T-i1y 14, 1PS2, trticji plaintiff coe.so'i cw.pleyon-t, to 1 *iv1>.i-. thc-i-.-tefoiv tcc-.i o ,i>1 c-ycd by defendant fctervlt, Ine.j your petiti'.-:i r* rcavcctlv) ly eluto anil fh<w to the Court that prior to junuory, 1C-33, the plant r-r.i ftc.Scry ri-ero plalu-.Uff 1 , j . i.. ,J ; J viorVod va$ ovr.ied *r.d operated by Kternlt, Ine., and ir. Janiary, !$!<, Sue Fuberold Conpftny Acquired said plant and foi'.ory, street v.McU tivo H has operated the cs.iO| 'that even If plaintiff had I con employed ty dofndpirb 'ib.e RabcroJd Company, vdiloh petitioners deny, it end defendant iter nit, Ir.e,, "wonld not te jointly liable to plaintiff) thvb joli.t liability cannot arise In favor of' plaintiff against iuacosttlvo e-rjli'yevi under tho allojjatxoa* in 'plaintiffpetition, and there ie a sil*jolhd'vref causes of eatioc and of-, partlos defendant in.this c&fee and there exists .In title suit Vseparate end } l <, severable cause uf notion on. which'-a. f>sf*te ,ar.d distinct suit filg-hb properly....' havo boon brought ty plaintiff Rgalnst difendant Ettrulb, Inc,, and complete ( relief afforded .e to utfV^caaeV ef ^otloiv with allfche parties on. ono xlda^.., ... of the controversy oitlteiis of differsct ;atates ifVon those.^n the'ether '/ :: " ' if,\ ' ' \ 'ide, the plaintiff -in Such. s-iiV'ljqins; a -pitisen';*nd -resident ef '-the -State ' i r*.' *'2 Jt'l of Missouri art! the .defeoltint Bternit^-lno,,r * .*. C earjsqravi'dn .organi'etd;^:-V ' ; ' 5 under the- lies of &4. State' r!f,,iicliwbre. ???'"'." i'.-v' rv.-`". VA. ''V'-.. A-. *; r. ' / ^ V '`''rr And yo-rpetltlonors.-furtheil!,'tVpy tf>aVthre~tl?>>; -ylthltt vjhieh thpy ' :'' 'v;-. are required bj,--the.taws of the State, of Hldoaurl and jbj-; thp fate* of Vile ; * .i Court to anewor of- plead li-. sgid eeaso hoe not yet`.?*plred.'v; -.- ; And your petiticnefs. offer herc7.ith a hfnid of- Rood spd sufflglent `i ' ' surety for -&oir acte'fih^'lB' the.-Dietriot -Court of tl\o Dnited States, for t-ie iarterr DlTielort of the Eastern Judloial flletriot of Miseow-i eJ.thln thirty 1 ... Atcyt Cxcn. the date of filint this petltlnn, a oortlfled oopy. of tbo rnoord ' : u in this salt, and for <iy}a5"all costs that amy be awarded by said District , ., y> . V ` _ CoArb If said Court i-.hall hold that tt-ls^taueo r/e.a -n-cr.gfully er lir.propcrlj- roneved thereto. GAF 22395 r r TEHISEIGRE, your petitioner* pruy thl* J:euoriiHc Court to proceed no further heroin except to e.nko the order of rcxiovol retired V;.' H-w, and to aeeept salt! surety end bond, end to cone? t? o record V r vr t<> he 'i rtozorvd Ir.to eatd District Court of the Vnited State*. * GAF 22396 r \. r rn r I i--' : ' i- ,c'*\ ' . i.j-*'U-. s-``fiJt'if`-Ml*. '' ` `' - ./ '-fey1 !>: i > '*'' ` r'- i-:' .* < ih, ->s ' ' . X'-. >-,V . iilr .; r . ,f-v J >: V 1 '> .''-V*!:/','*'> .>: - : . ` . , .. ' .; ,' "' -r.' ' 4. > .--l v>,i \ ..J?;=.*'?:- -\\-y>:*:' ' ' -' ``X,\ *** ' >' --fiyi ' ' ... . . : ' : ' ...J'/; i-.j ' : . ` ,, .j ... `W \ r:-<-r. ` " ` . <;/.. ...?. ... . : v: -f : ; -/ . <. -'s.Ki* s/sc-v .` .. .` stv - . > :r* ! = -i '>* v.-\U.*::'. .. - 1 >S J!, .> '`i I. i'-r v ' !/i: t. r - "V <: .c I'J.i' f V:>v.>. il'.': % \*\ ' ' > t-/};.?!';< or4^/. ij- IT- i f GAF 22398 r v r S (>'! WW/ \ .pyressa vtisy.. . H-^'dVAL ii 3 cou:tr 1 L. C. Kelaoy, Plaintiff, va. Ktornit, Ino., a eon-oration, .at si,| .* Defendants.____________________ Russell J. Hereoflaid, jv^tty^or PITf. ^ Alien, Moser & tfacaalek, Attya for Defte. Stemit, Ino., a corporation and ' The BubOrold Company, a corporation ~ . """Program ____t____________^ j Kon:i Clyde ,0. Book, Judge ' . ` . .. No.' -10061' 'y Root 1 vp-Y t oop^ist---' .. -.^osiparea -j&fyjfffr/f-'- ; 1: *r ^ t' * f *<*.; Notice -"CiVA i - v.* ''S ... -* /-n r* *> t I ' GAF 22399 ) GAF 22400 STATE 07 MISSOURI CITY OF ST. LOUIS I, FREEMAN B. BOSLEY, JR, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, CITY OF ST. LOUIS, within and for the City and State aforesaid (said Court being a Court of Record, having a Clerk and official Seal), do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing is a full, true and complete copy of the original Entire File. in the cause aforesaid, as fully as the ng remains among the records and files of said Court in my office. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court, at office, in the City of St Louis, 15th_____day of____ 0ctber, 19---- FREEMAN R. BOSLEY, JR. CLERK, CIRCUIT COURT ^ jw GAF 22401 MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT TWENTY SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT (ST. LOUIS CITY) < 03 T* fa ro M o I-- 0M CT\ 0) 1 00 PzI i-M3 S) m pi M c PJ NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION (Ufl all to rnljnm tijrae prmnta aijall nmtf. mting: By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Archivist of the United States, I certify on his behalf, under the seal ofthe National Archives ofthe United States, thatthe attached reproductions) is a true and correct copy of documents in his custody. J- S' Is J' f SIGNATURE M*JL NAME DATE Mark Corriston 12/8/93 TITLE Assistant Director NAME AND AOORESS OF DEPOSITORY National. Archives-Central Plains Regior 2312 East Bannister Road Kansas City, Missouri 64131 NA FORM 14007 <10-88) GAF 22402 31322 INDEX -Statement of Piling Petition - -- -- -- 1 Petition - -- -- -- -- -- -- -1 Writ of Summons - -- -- -- -- -- 9 Sheriff's Returns Thereon - -- -- -- - 9 Notice, Petition and bond of defendants Sternlt, Inc,, .and The Buheroid Company for removal, filed - - 11 Notice - -- -- -- -- -- -- - 11 ..Petition for Removal - -- -- -- - - -13 Removal Pond - -- -- -- -- - 17 Removal Order - -- -- -- -- -- 20 Certificate - -- -- -- -- -- - ei Bill of Costs - -- -- -- -- -- 22 GAF 22404 STATE or MISSOURI ) : SS ClTI OF ST. LOUIS } BE IT RHaBJBEHJl), that heretofore, to-w it ; on- the sixteenth day of Jemary, nineteen Hundred and Thirty-five,-' there nas filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, of'the City of St. Louis, irlthln d for the City and State aforesaid, a petition In cause No, E10061, Series "B" of the causes jfo'.said Court, wherein L. C. Kelsey is plaintiff, and Eternit, Iniov, a corporation, Eternit Mills, a corporation, The Ruberoid Company, a corporation, and Paul Beesai, an Individual, are defendants. The said petition is in words and figures,- as. follows, to-wlt: STATE 07 MISSOURI ) : SS CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) IN THE CIRCUIT COURT UITEIN AND FOR TEE CITY; OF ST. LOUIS, STATE OF MISSOURI FEBRUARY TERM - 1935 .' L. C. KELSEY, Plaint Iff vs. ETERNIT, INC., a corporation, ETERNIT MILLS, a corporation, THE HUBEROID COMPANY, a corporation, ` 9215 Rlverview Drive, and PAUL BEESON, an Individual, 5332 Goodfellow Avenue, Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PET ITION Plaintiff states that the defendants, Eternit, Inc., 'Eternit Mills, and The Ruberoid Company are now and were at all the times hereinafter mentioned corport- tions, doing business in the :City of St. Louis, State of Missouri and licensed to do business .as .corpora- tions in the Stete of Missouri, and liable to sue under the' la-.vs of said stete, and to be sued under the laws of said stnte; that the -1- GAF 22405 .1 defendant Paul Beeson, was at all the times.herein mentioned, an Individual, charged by the defendant corporations, particularly the Buherold Company,-;with the following duties as their employee, and that ;he entered into the performance of said duties in obedience to the orders of said corporate defendants, (1) of determining under what conditions plaintiff should be provided Wth an adequate and approved respirator, in order to protect him from the dust-;herein mentioned, (2) of determining equipping, and placing in op-elation dust ventilating equipment, dust removers, and other dust removal equipment in said plant far the purpose of removing the. dust'.from the atmosphere, whlob plaintiff was required tobreathe la the per formance of his duties far said defendant corporations, (31.of warn ing plaintiff of the danger of working in an atmosphere bhdrged with dust containing tbe aforementioned polsaious and injurious qualities (4) of determining when equipment in said plant, machlnes,''Sav;s, edgers, trimmers, should be equipped with blowers and hoods'ahd suction fans for the removal of durt, generated and produced by said-machines. Pl-intlff stetes that he was employed by all of the said' -defer;-cants from the 13th day of February 1938 to the 29th day of June,'.1932. Plaintiff further states that said defendants were'..at all the times hereinafter mentioned engaged in a trade or process.which subjected their employees and plaintiff to rhe danger and likelihood of contracting an illness or disease incident and Peculiar 'to said work or process to-wlt: the manufacture, crusning, sawing,. trimicing, ^.edging and loading into box cars of asbestos, vermicfclite, ;magnesium silicate, aluminum, silica and other asbestos products; that.the aforementioned operations generated and produced great quantities of injurious, poisonous end noxious dust, and that in said -plant and mill and in and about the places where plaintiff was required to v:ork, the atmosphere was charged with a minute, hot, dry dust, capable of being breathed into the air sacs of the lungs through the nose, throat and respiratory system, and that said oust o.aused chemical reaction and mechanical irritation of the resplratofy tract -2- GAF 22406 and lungs and produced the diseases peculiar to the inhalation of said dust, namely dust bronchitis, peribronchitis, pneumoconiosis; asbestosis, pulmonary fibrosis and other forms tt respiratory di seases, & 1 of which were peculiar to the inhalation of dust'gen erated and produced in the .'aforementioned operations, and,that-said trade or process was especially dangerous to the health of plaintiff as provided by Section 13253 of the revised statutes of Miss-ouri, 1929. rlelntlff for his cause of aotion states that-during all of his employment by the defendants he was ordered and uirectedrto work in its plant and mill in the loading of box cars and in aroundorushers, saws, edgers, trimmers, and other maohlnes which generated and produced great quantities of the aforementioned dust; "tha^ he was required to clean the mill with a house broom and to sneap.said dust , was required t os weep piles of shingles with a broom,'which required great quantities of said oust to be thrown into the atmos phere, and to work in and about its plant end mill where the ataos-. phere was fully oharged with the aforementioned minute, dry;,'hot, dust containing magnesium silicate, sericlte, and other relatively insoluble dust, which was poisonous, injurious end obnoxious;1 thet plaintiff inhaled greet quantities of said dust which irritated and destroyed the muoous membrane of the nose and throat, entered the air sacs Of the. lungs and gradually produced a pulmonary fibrosis, causing the development of lesions 1b the lungs, destroying tifce'vital capacity acd elasticity of the lungs, rendering pla intiff short of breath, subject to coughing, subject to pains in the chest due':to \% inflammation, productive of pleuretic adhesions and diaphragmatic adhesions, rendering plaintiff subject to the development of tuber culosis and other forms of respiratory diseases; that plaintiff has lost weight, lost his physical vitality, has difficulty in breathing, and that said conditions ere permanent, progressive, incurable and fat al; that plaintiff has expended for medical treatment in the X-ray, diagnosis and observation of his condition to the date of this, pe tition, One Hundred and Fifty Dollars, and will be required la' the -3- GAF 22407 future to expend additional sums of money In order to properly treat and care for bis said illness and disease; that plaintiff as ,ei' direct result of the Inhalation of said dust aforesaid, Is suffering, from asbestosls, bronchitis, and pulmonary fibrosis. *11 of whioh . plaint iff says <<as peculiar to and Incident to the Inhalation of said dust, and directly due to and oaueed by the joint, concurrent negligence'of the defendants, In this, to-*lt: 1* That the defendants In said trade or prooessj operated various machines, save, edgers, trlnmers, crushers, sanders,.-which, while being operated, oaueed vast quantities of fine, dry, hot dust, to be emitted Into the atmosphere and negligently and oarelessly failed and omitted to provide each and every machine with a hood, blower, or suotlon fan of sufficient power to oarry off said dust and prevent Its Inhalation by the plaintiff, and other employees, all in violation of the law of the State of Missouri then and there In full force and effeot being Revised statutes of Missouri, 1929, section 13234 being as follows: "PREVENTION OF SMOKE, DOST AND GAS -- Every person, . : flim or corporation using any polishing wheel or maohlne Of any character which generates dust, smoke or poisonous gases in its operation, shall provide each and every such wheel or machine with a hood which shall be connected with a blower or suction fan of ' sufficient power to carry off said dust, smoke and gases and prevent its inhalation by those employed... about said wheel or machine ***," 2. That the defendants In the conduct of their sald-trede or process operated various hoppers, sews, and sanders, which,'.while being operated, caused vast quantities of dust to be emitted into' the atmosphere and did negligently end oarelessly fall ana omit to provide each and every said machine with a hood or covering, and an adequate and efficient apparatus or other proper devices for the purpose of drawing away from the employees noxious, poisonous or injurious dusts ar. d preventing the employees from co;..ir.g into unnecessary contact therewith, and negligently felled to provide covers or hempen sale conveyors or receptacles, and negligently did fail to remove fraa- the floor of said plant the dust and refuse of a dangerous ohuruuter, ull -4- GAF 22408 in violation of the law of the state of Missouri, then and.,there in mil foree and effeot, being Revised Statutes of Missouri, ;199, Section 13268 whi oh is as follows: "HOPPERS, CHUTES, ETC. TO Bjs PROVIDED WITH C OVER DIG.. Ill hoppera or chutes or stellar devices used In the . course of any process or manufacture referred to in:.- Section 13853 shall be provided with a hood or / ooverlng and an adequate and efficient apparatus'or' - other proper devioe for the purpose of drawing away ir.'om' the employes noxious, poisonous or injurious dusts,', add preventing the employes from ooming into unnecessary oostaot therewith; and all conveyances or receptacles' used for the transportation about or the storage in"-any place where any such process or manufacture or labor Vi1 referred to in Seotion 13853 Is carried on shall be properly covered or dampened in such a way as to protect the health Of the employes, and no refuse of a dangisrous obareoter Incident to the work or prooess oarried. oh in any such place shall be allowed to remain accumulai-edt-oh the floors thereof." 3. That the said work and manufacture which defend ants,, we re engaged In was a work which would produce Illness or disease-peculiar to the work or prooess carried on there, and that at the time of plain tiff's employment and far a long time prior thereto, there had-heen manufactured and in use approved and effective devices, means, and methods which when in use, would prevent the diseases uforssSi'd; that said approved and effective devices are as follows, to-witr, (1J respirators, masks and muzzles to be warn by tbe said employees, (2) dust preventing, dust collecting, dust removing and dust -dampening machinery, appllanoes and apparatus, (3) wet saws and water attachments to be plaoed upon dry saws, (4) natural ventilation, ventilating systems, air purifying and cooling apparatus, heat and humidity re ducing appliances. Plaintiff further states that during the time of his employment the defendants feilea and omitted to furnish aL' 1. or any of the above described approved and effective devices, means nr ' methods for the prevention of the disease aforesaid, all-in violation of the law of the State of Missouri, then ,and thereln full fOrce:and' effect being section 13252 of the Revised statutes of the St.ate of Missouri, 1929, which is as follows: -5- GAF 22409 "EMPLOYER TO PROVIDE PROTECTION FROM DISEASES. That ; every employer of labor in this state engaged in ;'4-. carrying on any work, trade or prooeas which may produce any illness or disease peculiar to the work ...JI'W " or process oarrled'on, or whloh aubjeots the employee'to K the danger of illness or disease incident to such work;'..;/', trade or prooee. to which employees are exposed, shall?. for the protection of all employees engaged in such w.arky ' trade or prooess, adopt and provide approved and effective'., devices, means and methods for the prevention of such y..., industrial or oooupatlonal diseases as are incident to.:. such work, trade or prooess." 4. That the defendants negligently ordered and dlreqted.-plaintiff to work in and about its plant where the atmosphere was fully Charged with fine, minute, dry, hot particles of dust, oapable of entering the air sacs of the lungs and negligently failed to provide for .anyplace at the disposal of its employees, adequate and approved respirators, without oost to the employees, when said dust in which plain tiff-was . required to work was noxious, poisonous and Injurious to the health, when breathed into the body, all in violation of the law of the -State of Missouri, then and -there in full force and effect, being section 13254 of the Revised Statutes of the State of Missouri, 1929, which is as follows: "EMPLOYES TO BE FURNISHED WITH CLOTHING - RESPIRATORS-'-.'- TO BE USED WHILE AT WORK -- Every employer in this ' state to which this article applies shall provide for.. .. and place at the disposal of the employes so engaged, and shall maintain in good condition and without cost"to. - the employes, working clothes to be kept and used ex-' \ clusively by such employes while at work, and all v. employes therein shall be required at all times while . '. they are at work to uae and wear such clothing; and in all processes of manufacture or labor referred to in - ; this section which are productive of noxious or poisonous dusts, adequate end approved respirators shall! be furnished and maintained by the employer in good condition and without cost to the employes, and such employes sbbll use such respirators at all times while engaged in any ... work productive of noxious or poisonous dusts." v 5. That the said work and process which defendants were'. engaged in wqs a trade or process which was especially dangerous-to the health of plaintiff as provided by Section 13253 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, and defendants negligently failed during plain tiff's employment to require him to be examined by a c ccpetent , ."li censed, reputable physiolan as often as once every oalendsr month for the purpose of ascertaining if there existed in plaintiff any in dustrial or occupational disease cr illness peculiar or incident'tb -6- GAF 22410 .e character of the work in which plaintiff was engaged, all-in violation of the law of the State of Missouri, toeing Revised .Statutes of Missouri, 1929, Seotion 13255 which is in words and figures-as f oilows: "EMPLOYES TO BE EXAMINED MONTHLY BY PHYSICIAN. Every employer engaged In carrying on any prooess or manufacture referred to In section 13253 shall, as - often as ohife'every calendar month, cause all ... ! employes who.'oome into direct contact with the poisonous agencies or injurious processes referred to/' in section 13853 to toe examined toy a competent, : licensed and reputatole physician for the purpose of : ascertaining If there exists in any employe any Industrial or occupational disease or illness or any- V. disease or Illness due or incident to the character of the work in which employe is engaged." 6. That the said work and prooess in which defendants.were engaged was a work or prooess which was especially dangerous ,to the health of plaintiff, in that there was generated and produced greet quantities of Injurious, obnoxious and poisonous dust containing asbestos, magnesium silicate, sllioa, and other substances and defendants negligent* ly failed to post in conspicuous places in its said plant tfh^fe such work and prooess was carried on, appropriate notices of the-.known danger to the health of said employees, arising from the seid work1 or:process, and simple instructions as to the known means of avoiding the';in jurious consequences thereof, all in violation of the law of the State of Missouri then and there in full force and effect toeing Section 13254 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, 1929. 7. Thst the defendants negligently and carelessly assured plaintiff that he could with reasonable safety, work in its. said plant where great quantities of obnoxious, poisonous asbestos dust was generated and produced, and which was breathed into his lungs and capable of entering the air sacs thereof, without danger to his. health under the circumstances aforesaid, when the defendants knew, or_. by the exercise of ordinary care, coulo have known that the inhalation, of silica dust was dangerous to the health of plaintiff, end if breathed into his lungs would cause and permit the development of diseases peculiar to the inhalation of said dust. All of which plaintiff says\w.as directly due tc and caused by the concurrent negligence of the defendants, direct ly and proximately producing and causing the development of plaintiff's -7- \ GAF 22411 illness and disease aforementioned. 8. That the defendants negligently ordered and directed '-Vi> plaintiff to clean aald mill and the floor thereof, and pile#.of ^ shingles therein with a house broom, and to sweep said dust-'and to create said dust in the air, which he was required to breathe., and negligently failed to dampen said dust when the defendtnts'.kniw, or. by the exercise of ordinary cere on their part, could have-'kndwn that the sweeping of said dust dry, with a house broom, would create dust In ttie air where plaintiff was required to breathe, In such-.quantities as to be harmful, Injurious and obnoxious, and Knew, or by ..the exer cise of ordinary care, could have known that it was practicable and feasible to dampen aald dust with water or other means, and 'thus and thereby prevent the generation of said dust, thereby diredti^bausing plaintiff's Illness.and disease. WHEREFGRK, plaintiff says he has been damaged in"the sin of Thirty Thousand Collars ($30,000) for which sum he prays judgment against the defendants, together with his coats, RPSSSLL J.H0R5BFIBU_________ Attorney for Plaintiff. " '' Dpon the filing of said petition writ of stm-ions l'ca? -service upon the defendants was issued by the Clerk of said Court, directed to the Sheriff of the City of st. Louis, which writ of summons and Sheriff's returns thereon are respectively in words anc figures, as follows, to-wlt: -8- !! 1 GAF 22412 STATE OF MISSOURI ) ; SS C TTY OF ST. LOUIS ) *" THE STATE OF MISSOURI, . To the Sheriff of the City of St. Louis, Greeting:- V/e command you to sunrnon:- Bternit Ino., a corporation,'Eternit Mills, a corporation, The Ruberoid Company, a corporate ji:, *'ai)d Paul Beeson, an individual, to appear before the Judges of our-Circuit Court on the first day of the next term thereof, to be held'-in the City of St. Louis, at the Civil Courts Building, 12th and,,liarke.t Streets, on the First Monday of FEB. next, then and there ter "answer the complaint of L. C. Kelsey as set forth in the annexed petition; and have you then and there this writ: Witness H. SAM PRIEST, Clerk of our said Court', with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office in SEAL the City of St. Louis, this 17th day;pf /January, in the year of our Lord, nineteen hundred and thirty-five H, SAM PRIEST____________ . '-Clerk Served this writ in the City cf at. Louis, MlssouriY on the within named defendant the Ruberoid Company ( a corporation)y this IS day of January 1935 by delivering a copy of the writ and-'-p..etition as furnished by the Clerk to E. Frampe { sect) of the sc id', defen dan t ^Corporation, he being in said defendants usual business office and .n charge thereof. The President or other Chief Officer of'aaid De fendant could not be found in the City of St. Louis at the 'time., of service. . THOS R. MADDEUj_Sherif f 3y CARL GLAS3____ ___________ x>eputy -S- GAF 22413 I further. served this writ la the City of St. (Louis , Missouri, on the within named defendant the Eternlt Ino., 'eiVodrporation), this 18 day of January 1935 by delivering a copy of"the writ as furnished by the Cleric to E. Prampe (Sect) of the su id. 4eCend*nt Corporation, he being in said defendants usual business offfoe-ani in charge thereof. The President or other Chief Officer of said. Defendant could not be found in the City of St. Louis at the time ;af'servics. THOS R. MADDEN . Sheriff;- /'. By CARL GLASS Deputy,/:^;' : ,7 I further exeeuted this writ in the City of StVLdjiis, Missouri, this 18 day of January 1935 by delivering a copy ;ofj""the writ as furnished by the Cleric to Paul Beeson, defendant herein. THOS R. MADDEK, Sheriff' ' " By CAHL GLASS DeDuty.. And at the December Term, 1934, the foliov ir further proceedings were had in said cause, t o-vv it: -10- GAF 22414 Friday, February 1st, 1935 L. C. Kelsey -vs-210081-3 ) | Eternit, Ino., et al j Notioe, petition an! bond of defendants sternitinc-., and The Ruberoid Company, for removal, filed. ' v; - The said notioe, petition and bona ci' defendant if`It emit Inc., a corporation and The Ruberoid Company, a corporation'for .'removal of this cause to the District Court of the United States fxr.' -lbe. Eastern Division of the Eastern Judiclel District of Missouri are respectively in words and figures, as follows, to -wit: ! STATS OF MISSOURI ) ss CITY Or ST. LOUIS ) .' IN THE CIRCUIT COURT - FEBRUARY TERM - 1935i' ;Y L. C. KELSEY, Plaintiff, vs. ETERNIT, INC., a corporation, ETERNIT MILLS, a corporation, THE RUBEROID COMPANY, a ccrooration, end PAUL BEESON, an individual, Defendants. ) ( ) ( No. 210061 ) ( ) ( Dlv, No. 1. ( NOTICE OF REMOVAL PETITION TO THE ABOVE NAMED PLAINTIFF, L. C. KELSEY, OR RUSSELL J. HORSEFIELD, ESQ., HIS ATTORNEY: You are hereby notified that defendants Eternit, Inor, ..anc' The Ruberoid Company will file in the Circuit Court, City of st, Louis, Missouri, the removal petition and removal bond hereto attached,, f or -11- GAF 22415 L the purpose of removing the sale ccuse to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Eastern judicial1 District of Missouri. And you are further notified that the said defendants till, on Monday, February 4, 1935, at 9:30 o'clock A. M., or as ao;on thereafter as they may be heard, pray said Circuit Court, ''ity of at, Lbuis, Missouri, to approve said bond and to aocept the surety thereof and to.order re moval as prayed In said petition to said District Court of the: United States for the Eastern Division of the Eastern Judicial Distflnt of Missouri. ETERNIT, INC., and THE RUBESOID CfUeAhf, T>V AT.T.Tm, MnSTSt M . MARSALSK Xhelr Attorneys. }/<: '' ' ' ' The undersigned plaintiff In the above cause hereby acknowledges that copy of the above notice, with copy of petition and bond for removal therein mentioned, was duly served upon him this 1 day of February, 1935. L. c. SEISE? "FTaTntlFf.------- By Russell J. HerSgXSeld His Attorney. -12- GAF 22416 .STATE OF MISSOURI ) : ss CITY OF ST. LOUIS j IN THE CIRCUIT COURT - FEBRUARY TERM - 1935. L. C. KELSEY, Plaintiff, vs. ETERNIT, INC., a corporation, Eternit Ullla, a corporation, THE RUBEROID COMPANY, a corporation, and PAUL BEESON, an individual, Defendant. () ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( No. 210061 Dlv. NO. 1 PETITION OF STERNIT, INC., AND THE RUBER 0 ID COMPANY; CORPORATIONS, FOR REMOVAL OF CAUSE TO UNITED STATES . DISTRICT COURT.V.' ; ' l I Now oome Eternit, Inc., and The Ruherold Company, defendants above named, and file their petition for the removal of the above entitled cause to the United States District Court for the Eastern Division of the Eastern Judicial District of Missouri and respectfully show to the Court that this is a civil action at law, being a suit brought by the above named plaintiff against the above neraed defendants to recover for alleged injuries which plaintiff claims ir. said-..petition to have been caused by alieffd negligsnae on the part of the above named defendants; that the plaintiff in said cause was at the time -of..the commencement of said suit and ever since has been and still is.a..-' citizen and resident of the StJte of Missouri; that Eternit, ;inb was at the time of the commenced act or said suit and ever since- had been ana still is a corpor tion organized anaer the laws of tbe.Stute of Delaware, a citizen and resident of said state; that The Ruberoid Company was at the time of the commencement of said suit and ever since has been and still is a corporation, organized under the laws of the State of New Jersey, a citizen and resident of said state; ytfaat Eternit Mills, alleged in plaintiff's petition to be a ccrpcr-at'ioh, is not now and never has been e corporation enc is not and never has beer, e legel entityeoapable of suing or being sued and is merely:the 13- GAF 22417 name of a manufacturing plant of The Ruberoia comoany '**'*? . ckV* tlnguish It from other manufacturing plants of said comparij^i ana that the matter and amount in dispute in said cause exceeds,ex clusive of Interest and costs, the sum or value of Three thousand Dollars ($3,000.00). Your petitioners further show to the Court that t.h;e defendant Paul Beeson, who is a oitizen and resident of the State of-Vilissour 1, was not Joined in good faith as a party defendant in said c.ause, but was fraudulently Joined by the plaintiff as a defendant in-haid cause for the purpose of fraudulently defeating the Jurlcoic tiod-of the ft | District Court of the United States in said cause and far the- fraudulent, purpose of preventing a removal or this oause to the.District ) ! Court of the United States; that the allegations contained-.'in .paragraphs j numbered 1 to 6, inclusive, in plaintiff's petition fall to-state facts constituting a oause of action against defendant Paul Beeson:,. because 1 i said Paul Beeson was not at any time the employer of the "plaintiff and | such allegations oan be directed only against plaintiff's...employer and master and the negligence attempted to be alleged under-said alle gations against said Paul Beeson is such as only plaintiff's master and employer could be liable for; your petitioners further state chat the allegations contained in paragraphs numbered 7 and 8 in plaintiff's petition charging that said Paul Beeson, as one of the Ueieiic-jants herein negligently assured plaintiff that he could with reasonable.safety wori under the conditions described and he negligently ordered and directed plaintiff to keep clean the mill and the floor thereof .. itb a house broom, under the conditions described, arc- false end: fraudulent end plaintiff is without credible evidence to support such allegations and they are made solely for the purpose of attempting to. state a cause of action against said Paul Beeson in an attempt to.,fraudulently prevent a removal or this case to the District Cpurt of the "United State. Your petitioners further state that the allegations in plain tiff's petition to the effect that he v.-as employed by all title defend ants are felse and fraudulent; they state that plaintiff at.no time was employed by defendant Paul Beeson and your petitioners-state that -14- i! GAF 22418 defendant The Ruberoid Company acquired the plant and pro-perty of defendant Sternit, Inc., after July 14, 1932, when plaintiff ceased employment, he having theretofore been employed by defendant iternlt, Inc., your petitioners respectfully state and show to the Court that prior to January 1933, the plant and factory where plaintiff-worked was owned and operated by "tcrnit Inc., and in January, 1933, The Ruberoid Company acquired said plant and factory, since which-time it has operated the same; that even if plaintiff han been-employed by defendant The Ruberoid Company, which petitioners deny, .it and defendant Eternit, Inc., would not be Joi.tly liable to. plaintiff; that Joint liability cannot arise in favor of pi all.', tiff against successive employers under the allegations in plaintiff's petition and' there is a misjoinder of causes of action and of parties defendant in this oese and there exlstB in this suit a separate and severable! cause of action on which a separate and distinct suit might properly have been brought by plaintiff against defendant eternit, Inc., and complete relief afforded as to such cause of action with all the parties on one side of the controversy citizens of different states fran those on the other side, the plaintiff in such suit being a citizen and resident of the State of Missouri and the defendant fternit, Inc., being a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware; ind your petitioners further show that the time .with in which they are required by the laws of the State of Missouri and'.by the rules of this Court to answer ar plead in said cause has not yet.expired. and your petitioners offer herewith a bond of good and suf ficient surety for their entering in the District Court of. the United States for Hie Eastern Division of the Eastern Judicial. District of Missouri within thirty days from the date of filing this petition, a certified copy of the record in this suit, and for paying-eL 1 costs that may be awarded by said District Court if said Court, shall hold that this cause was wrongfully or improperly removed thereto. THEREFORE, your petitioners pray this Honorable court to prooeed no further herein except to make the-order of removal re quired by law, and to acoept said surety and bond, and to.pause the -15- GAF 22419 record herein to be recoved into sale District ^curt of'the United Sta tes ETERKIT, INC., By_______ '.V. E. MOSER Its Agent . - . THE RUBEROIB COMPANY i-''- By W. B. MOSER__________^ Its Agent ALLEN, MOSER & MARSALKK__________ Attorneys for Petitioners. ' State of Missouri ) : ss City of i^t. Louis ) W. E. Moser, being duly sworn, on his oeth says he'is agent end attorney for defendants Eternlt, Ino., and The Bubero'ld-Coi-pany in this behalf; that he has read the foregoing petition aind knows the contents thereof and the statements therein contained are .true, as he verily believes. W. S. M0S2R Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 1st day of February, 1935. My commission expires Nov. 30, 1935. JULIAN C.JAECKBL Notary Public ' . . s'EA-'L -16- GAF 22420 IN THE CIBCUIT - FE3RUARY TERM - 1935. 2,, C. X3L5EY, Plaintiff, vs. 3TDRKIT, INC. , a corporation, SIERN-T IfILLS, a corporation, THE RUBE30ID C051?ANY, a corporation, ani PAUL BEESON, an individual, Defendants. ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( J j ( NO. 210061 Dlv. No. i. REMOVAL 30MD KNOW AIL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the undersigned Bterr.it, Inc., ana The Ruberold Company, as principal, and National Casualty Company, as surety, are held and firmly hound unto L. 0. Kelsey in the sum of Five Hundred hollars ($500.00), for the payment of which well and truly to be made we do J.intly and severally bind ourselves, our heirs, lega 1 representatives and assigns firmly by these presents. The condition of he above bond is as follows: That WHEREAS, the above bounden sternlt, Inc,,.and The Ruberold Company have filed their petition in the Circuit Court, City .'of. St. Louis, Missouri, for removal to the District Court of the United States in and for the eastern Division of the Eastern Judici: 1 District of Missouri, of a certain cause pending in said state court wheTein said L. C. Kelsey is plaintiff and said sternlt, Inc., e corporation, and said The Ruberold Company, a corporation, are named as two o: the defendants. NOW, if said `ternit, Inc., and said The Ruberold Company shall enter in the said District "ourt of the United '-totes within thirty days from the date of filing said petition certified copy' of the record in said suit, and shall wall and truly pry all-'costs that may be ewarded by said District Court of the United states''if -17- GAF 22421 seid '-ourt shall hold that said suit was wrongfully or iaprope-ly removed thereto, then this obligation shall be void; otherwise to re-ain in full force and virtue. VfITNBSS our hands and seals this 1st day of February, 1935, ETERNIT, INC., By ALLEN, MOSER & MARSALEK Its Agents and Attorneys. ^ THE RUBEROID COi-RANY, ... BY ALLEN. MOSER & MAR3AL2K ________ Its Agents and attorneys. . ~ NATIONAL CASUALTY COMPANY,. . ' By______ K. M. HICKEY At tomey-ln-fa c t. ', .. Approved by Court this 4th day of Feb., 1935 ( S E A-L ) Attest: H. SAM PRIEST, Clerk (SEAL) 18- GAF 22422 STATE Or' MISSOURI ) CITY 01 ST. LOUIS ) On this 1st day of February 1935, before me appeared K. Hickey to me personally known, who, being by me first-'duly sworn, did say that he is Attorney-In-Fact of the NATIC-HaL CASUALTY COI'FAKY, a corporation, organized under the laws of the State, of Michigan, ana that the seel affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation; and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its 303rd of Directors and the said 2. M. Hickey acknowledged- said in strument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. . IK TESTIMONY ^THEREOF, I have hereunto set ay hand and notarial seal, the day and year first above written. ( SEAL) 'VBSLEY H, BEC2R______________ Notary Public, City or At. Louis, Mo. My commission expires March l?th, 1035. -19- GAF 22423 And at the February Term, 1935, the following further proceedings -.'.ere had In said cause, do-wit: Monday, February 4, 19J5 I. c. Kelsey, -vs-210061-B ) ( ) i-ternit, Inc., a corporation, Eternlt Mills, a corporation. The Buberoid Company, a corpora tion, and Paul Beeson, an individual. ( ) ( Non at this dey come ;-;ternit, Inc., a corporation'and The Ruberoid <-;o[apany, a corporation, by their attorneys and submit to the Court a notice and verified petition heretofore riled, praying for an order removing this cause to the District ^ourt cf .tiie United States for the Eastern Division of the Eastern Judicial. District of Missouri, and also present to the Court their bond heretofore filed, conditioned according to law in the penal sum of ''iv* Hundred Dollars ($500.00) with National Casualty Company as surety; and the Court having seen and examined said petition and bond, and being-'.satisfied that written notice of said petition and bond for removal'has been given the adverse party to this suit, prior to filing the same, doth accept said petition and bond and doth order that said bond be approved and filed which is done, that the prayer of said petition he. granted, and that the Clerk of this court forthwith certify for entering in the District ^ourt of the United Jtates for the Eastern,Division of the Eastern Judicial District of Missouri, a copy of the record in the above entitled cause, as fully as the same remains on '-file and of record in this Court; that no further proceedings be had.in this suit in this Court. -20- GAF 22424 STATS OF MISSOURI ) : 3S CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) I, H. SAM PRIYST, Cleri: of the Circuit -out's, city of St. Louis, within and for the ity ana State aforesaidy certify the above and foregoing to be a full, true end cor..-.ate transcript of the record and proceedings in the above entitled cause,, includ ing the notice, petition and bond for removal, acceptance of said petition and bond and the order of removal, as fully as .the seme remain on file and of record in ay office. IN TESTIMONY .'.'HERFOF, I 'nave- hereunto set my hand and affixed thb seal of said Court, at office, in the City of ot. Louis, this ,14th day of February, 1935. leric, circuit Lour t; 21- GAF 22425 /; V. I Ni \ j w J It 5 "O% a uj a o*/ Sa ga a a a a 111; 8 CO 8 CO 45Se5SctJSc5*Ss|?&^3|a*2 ^5 So ; Is ''N Vk % *3 'N * w ues i _ e 1 >; te*5* |* * ) 8 3 $ O K jf IstfSs <a2^I2 'C k9 CK i 5I N NS * *( fS "V \ X vi "NS" g'f: ; s 5 7 ? 3 "j 3J? .s!-:;rissj a E x v B0..O=sorO0=o0Oa*0Sw0IQ=(S3ClCiSCuC^-i*'.^o^if&lSNIfOee SiC*Sme* M>J>- asMaO 3 3O n"S n "o " GAF 22426 GAF 22427 m THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF THE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. SEPTEMBER TERM, 1934. L. C. KELSEY, ) Plaintiff, ) TS. ETERNIT, INC., a corporation, ) ) ) ) ETERNIT MILLS, a corporation, ) THE RUBEROIS COMPANY, a corporation, .) PAUL BEESON, an individual, ) Dir. Vo. Defendant*. ) MOTION CF DEFENDANTS ETERNIT, INC., AND EE RUBEROID >. COMPANY TO REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO GIVE SECURITY FOR _________ COURT COSTS. _______________ ________ Nov oome defendant* Etarnit, Ino., and The Raberoid Company and respectfully show to the Court that this ia an action for damages brought by plaintiff against defendants on aooount of alleged injuries, illness and disease whioh he olaims to have sustained through alleged negllgenoe of de fendant*. ., These defendants further respectfully show .to the Court that plaintiff has failed to give security for Court costs which will accrue in this lection. WHEREFORE, the premises considered, these defendants move that the Court require plaintiff to give ample seourity for costa which may acorue in this action. STATE CF MISSOURI ) ) CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) j -if/' ___ Attorneys for Defendants Eternit, Inc .7 and The Ruberoid Company. W. R. Moser, of lawful age, being duly sworn on his oath, states.that he is one of the attorneys for defendants Eternit, Ino., and The Ruberoid Company and authorised'to make this affidavit in their behalf) that he has rsad the foregoing motion, knows the oontent* thereof and that the facta and averments therein con tained are true, aa he verily believes. i/-~'y Subscribed and sworn to^Before me, thls/ffi day of February, 1936. My commiseion expires-'f Q;/ yO , , C?P? of plaintiff, this Hcrtary Public. 4boTe motion mailed to Ruesell J. Ho^sefield, attorney for day of Februaiy, 1936. . ! GAF 22428 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COU^T FOB.- THE EASTERN DIVISION OF THE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. SEPTEMBER TERM, 1934. L. C. KELSET, . .. . .) Plaintiff, j a. . . __ .) ) ETERNI7, INC., a eorpcrartion, .) ETERNIT MILLS, a corporation, ) THE RUBEROID CCKPANY, a oorporation, ) and PAUL BEESON, an individual, ) .) Defendanta, ) . > 11322 Dir. No. MOTION OF DEFENDANTS ETEHIIT, INC., AND THE RUBEROID ' OOMPANY TO REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO GIVE SECURITY FOR ;. ______________ COURT COSTS. '.`: (pJ l> Ha jRj O FEB 18 1935 diS 0! C` :' I GAF 22429 IK THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERS DIVISION OP 5HE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. SEPT0MER TERM. 1954. L. C. KELSEY, .) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ETERNIT, INC., a oorparation, ) E7ERNIT KILLS, a corporation, THE RUBEROID CCMPANY, a corporation, ) } and PAUL BEESCfH, an individual, ) ) Defendants. ' 11322 Dir. No. SEPARATE ANSNER OF DEFENDANT ETERNIT, INC. I I GAF 22430 IN THE UNITED STATES. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF THE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. SEPTEMBER TERM, 1934. L. C. KELSEX, ) v.' Plaintiff, ) ) \ i : ) ETERNIT, INC., a corporation, ') STERN XT MILLS, a corporation, ) THE RUBEROID CCMPANY, a corporation, ) and PAUL BEESON, an Individual, ) \/ Defendants) Ho* 11322 Dlv. No. SEPARATE ANSWER OF DEFENDANT XHE RUBEROID ____________ COMPANY. a -a a Ha tr. FEB 181935 <? i GAF 22431 i IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF THE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MISSOURI. SEPTEMBER TERN, 19J4. L. C. KELSEY, Plaintiff, " ETEEHIT, INC., a oorporatlon, ETERNIT KILLS, a oorporatlon, THE RUBEROID CGKPAIT, a oorporatlon, and PAUL BEESON, an Individual, . .. ftaa >4b a } ) ) ) ! ) ) ) ) ) No. DIt. No. SEPARATE ANSWER OF DEFENDANT PAUL BEESON. I! GAF 22432 JL IN THE UKITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION. OF THE EASTERN JUDICIAL D STRICT OP MISSOURI. SOT EMBER TERM, 1054. L. C. KELSEY, ) Plaintiff, j i a. ) ) i) I ETERNIT, INC., a corporation, ) ETERNH MILLS, a corporation, ) THE KUBEROID CCKPANY, a corporation, and PAUL BEESON, an Individual, ) ' Div. No, ) Defendants. ) SEPARATE ANSWER OP DEFENDANT PAUL BEESON. ' Nov oomes Paul Beeson, one of the above named defendants, and, for his separate answer to plaintiff's petition filed herein, denies eaoh and every allegation in said petition contained and set' forth. WHEREFORE, having fully answered, this defendant prays to be henoe discharged with his oosts. Attorneys for Defendant Paul Beeson, \ GAF 22433 3 OH nCT- eta cr h* ete*~4 crs 9o *o - M" 0.0 ^ CO S go so r o L. s< hC6** forcl H-lft Boh or M CD )Q. 0 3 T1 * "Slm w> H CP JJ co co a> 4 o rp>* H CO H CD 0 HFV- H xt &r+ S CD2 CO HW c. Osc CO CD * CD H & o Crt5* 0 0 *1c ST ft ,3n ' ** c/s n e ee B zo lnf>* Ham H *< 5 % O' 2 J5- CC jns JC \ GAF 22434 V K l IH THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ' WITHIN AND FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF THE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MISSOURI L. C. KELSEY, Plaintiff, vs. STERNIT, INC., ETERNIT KILLS, THE RUBEROID COMPANY, corporations, and PAUL BEESON, Defendants. j yt3zzs ) MOTION TO REMAND Comes now the plaintiff in the atova entitled cause and moves the Court to remand this cause to the Circuit Court within and for the City of St. Louis', State of Missouri, and for grounds for-'said motion states: 1. That the petition for removed signed by defendants, Sternit, Inc., and the Ruberoid Company, wholly fails to state faots sufficient to warrant the removal of this oause from the Circuit Court of St. -Louis, Missouri to this court. 2. That the petition of plaintiff herein, states a Joint cause of aotion against Sternit, Inc., The Ruberoid Company, corporations and Paul Beeson, an individual, and that said Paul Beeson, is and was at all of the times mentioned in said removal petition, a citizen and resident of the State of Missouri. v 3. That plaintiff's petition herein oh&rges defendant, Paul Beeson with misfeasanoe, aid thereby pleads a question of aotion sounding in negligence against said Paul Beeson. 4. That plaintiff denies that Paid Beeson was made a co-defendant in this oause for the purpose of fraudulently depriving defendants of their right to remove this oause to this court, arfl that GAF 22435 Jo plaintiff states for a number of years, as alleged in his petition, Paul Beeson was the Plant Manager, Superintendent, and in complete charge and control of the plant where plaintiff was employed by,-the' defendants, and that during said time, Paul Beeson had entire oontrol of the question of when and where respirators should be furnished, what hind, if any, dust oontrol equipment should be installed, and governed the manner and method of operation of said plant, and directed plaintiff speolflcally in his wort, and made all the decisions with reference to the condition of the workers, and that plaintiff before said petition was filed, had admissions and depositions of said Paul Beeson, that he did undertake to perform the aforementioned duties for the defendants, end that Paul Beeson was the employer of the plaintiff, and plaintiff was under his direct supervision and control, and that plaintiff has credible evldenee to support eaeh and every allegation of his petition with referenee to all said defendants; that the defendant,- Paul Beeson, testified by deposition before the institution of this suit, that he had charge of this plant where plaint Iff was employed, from September, 1930): on and after the Ruberoid Company bought them,, and -that he managed said plant from 1930 for the Ruberoid Company, whioh was two years prior to plaintiff's severing his eonneotion with said companies. Plaintiff farther states that during his employment on and after July 30th by said defendants, that Paul Beeson determined when and where goggles should be worn, when and where respirators should be worn, what machines should be equipped with blowers and suction f&ps, and determined the manner and method of operation of said plant; and gave direct orders to plaintiff in connection with said work. WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays this Court for an Order, remanding this oause to the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri. it I l? GAF 22436 STATE 0? MISSOURI ) ) S3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) L. C. Kelsey, being first duly sworn upon his oath, says he has read the foregoing motion to remand, and knows the contents, thereof, and that the statements therein contained are true, as he verily believes. Subscribed and Bworn to before me, a Rotary Publio, this day of 1935. My commission expires /vs? UMVOTP!---------- Copy of this motion served on Messrs. Allen, Moser and Uarsalek, oounael of reoord for Sternit, ins., and She Buberold Company, this Mr- day of 9__7 1988 Attorneys xor berenoants. sternlt, Ino. and The Buberold Co. V GAF 22437 IB IBS UNITED STATES DXSTBICT COUBT TOR THE EASTERN DIVISION at THE EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OP MISSOURI. MARCH mki. 1935. L. C EELSEY, Plaintiff, 'Ho. 11522 stern it, me., smoii mills, THE RUBEROID COM?ANT, corporations, and PAUL BEESON, DIt. Vo. 2 Defendants. ) STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL. All of the matters and things in controversy in the above entitled oauee baring been adjusted, oamprenited and finally settled, it is hereby stipulated and agreed, by and between the above named, plaintiff end defendants Bternit, Inc, The Ruberold Company and Paul Beeeon, that thle eaute ehall be dlesissed with prejudloe to any other or future aotlon on aooounb of the matter* end thing* contained and eat forth in plaintiff's petition, and that Court ,eoete shall be paid by defendant* Bternit, Ine., and The Ruberold Company. Vttnees our honde, at St. Louie, Mietouri, thiV^^day of June, 1935* I, GAF 22438 g^F 22439 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DIVISION OF TOE -EASTERN JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF BO. MARCH TERM, 1635. t f / c=w J' t % to %& XZ fr." \. \