Document GKO0Jxrqv6Mrr7nnmXZVV1zjY

FILE NAME: US Gypsum (USG) DATE: July 29, 1986 DOC#: USG057 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: 1986 Legal - Deposition of Suzanne Kay Torrey / 1 f '* ' 1 STATE OF SOUTH C A R O L I N A ) ) SS: 2 C O U N T Y OF KEtR S H A W ) . f 3 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINE, COUNTY OF KERSHAW IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS * 4 K E R S H A W COUNTY BOARD OF EDUC?TION, ) 5 ) Plaintiff, ) 6 ) vs. ) No. 85-CP-28-58 7 ) W.R. G R ACE AND CO., et al . , ) 8 ) - Defendants. ) _ 9 1 C 1 1 1 2 The d e p o s i t i o n of S U Z ANNE KAY TORREY, 1 3 t a k e n in the a b o v e - e n t i t l e d c a u s e , b e f o r e S U S A N M. 1 4 MARTINO, a Notary Public vithin and for the County 1 5 of Cook, State of Illinois, and a Certi f i e d 1 6 S h o r t h a n d R e p o r t e r of said s t a t e at 101 S o u t h W a c k e r 1 7 Drive, C hicago, I l l inois, on the 29th day of July, 1 8 A .D . , 1986, at 9:30 a.m. 1 S /t 7 20 * i 2 1 sf~ 2 2 2 3 24 r W W a 0 , 1 'o C fc, c j ' x o i L i x l j r ^ a n d c z / f i i o c L a U i , d J n i . CfLUuao, O ttinoU (312) 782-8087 2 1 PRESENT: 2 MR. D A N I E L A. S P E I G H T S , (304 Lee A v e n u e , 3 Hampton, South Carolina 29924), 4 - and - 5 HUMPHREY, FARRINGTON, PRINS & McCLAIN, (123 West Kansas, 6 I n d e p e n d e n c e , M issouri 64050), by: MR. K E N N E T H B. M c C L A I N , 7 appeared on behalf cf the Plaintiff; 8 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, 9 (2000 One Logan Square, P h i l a d e l p h i a , P e n n s y l v a n i a 19103), by: 1 0 MR. E. B A R C L A Y CA L E , JR., 1 1 - and - 1 2 TURNER, FADGET, GRAHAM & LANEY , (1801 Main Street, 1 3 Columbia, South C a r o l i n a 29202), by: MR. E D W I N P. M A R T I N , 1 4 appeared on behalf of United States 1 5 Gypsum Company. 1 6 1 7 R E P O R T E D BY: S U S A N M. M A R T I N O , C . S . R . 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 ! 23 2 4 WWi <zJX>o ie .ii(? zrc ) a r u l 3 1 INDEX 2 WITNESS 3 SUZANNE KAY TORREY 4 By Nr. Speights 5 EXHIBITS 6 plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit 7 No . 1 8 NO . 2 9 NO . 3 ' 1 0 NO . 4 1 1 NO . 5 1 2 NO . 6 1 3 No . 7 1 4 No . 8 1 5 No . 9 1 6 NO . 10 1 7 No . 1 1 1 No. 12 1 9 NO . 13 20 NO. 14 2 1 N o . 15 22 N o s . 16 a n d '7 2 3 N o s . 13, 19 and 2 0 24 EXAMINATION 1 i 22 25 26 29 30 3 1 43 4 9 50 66 6 7 7 3 77 7 9 8 2 8 3 n 'l/oife., an d c^ rfiiocuitci., dJnc. 4 1 1 (WHEREUPON, the witness was duly 2 s w o r n .) i 3 MR. S P E I G H T S : Thi s d e p o s i t i o n is taken 4 pursuant to notice and orders from the bench by the 5 H o n o r a b l e J o h n H a m i l t o n S n i t h on J u l y 2, 1 9 8 6 and 6 J u l y 22, 1986 w h i c h r u l i n g s are g o i n g to be 7 m e m o r i a l i z e d in a w r i t t e n order p r o b a b l y to be filed 8 t h i s w e e k . T h e d e p o s i t i o n w i l l be c o n d u c t e d in 9 acc o r d a n c e with the a p p l i c a b l e rules of civil 1 O procedure . 1 1 SUZANNE KAY TORREx , 1 2 called as a w i t n e s s herein, having been first duly 1 3 sworn, was e x a m i n e d and t e s t i f i e d as follows: 1 4 EXAMINATION 1 5 BY M P . SPEIGHTS: 1 6 Q. Would you stare your full name, please? 1 7 A. Suzanne Kay, K-a-y, Terrey. 1 8 Q . What is ycur p resent address, Ms. To rre y ? 1 9 A . 9 1 1 Cran , C-r-a-n, Evanston, Illinois. 2 O Q. What i s your b u s i n e s s address? 2 1 A . 10 1 Scut h Wacker Drive, Chicago, Illinois 2 2 Q. I believe that's the corporate 23 h e a d q u a r t e r s of USG C o r p o r a t i o n and U.S. sum 24 Company, is than correct? W/A < z/x>oi.n L 'C'Uj a n d < ^ /fa u 2c u i t z i . , n c . {IhieLCLQO. L'LhnoU (312) 7S2-80S7 5 1 A. It's the c o r p o r a t e h e a d q u a r t e r s of USG 2 Corporation. I'm not sure it's accurate any more to i 3 say it's the h e a d q u a r t e r s of U n i t e d S t a t e s G y p s u m 4 Company. 5 Q. M y u n d e r s t a n d i n g , Ms. T o r r e y , is t h a t y o u 6 are a l a w y e r , is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 7 A . Yes, sir. 8 Q. And from 1977 u n t i l the end of 1984, you 9 were a lawyer at the U.S. G y p s u m Company? 1 0 A . Correct. 1 1 Q. From 1985 until present, you have been a 1 2 lawyer with USG Corporation? 1 3 A . That's correct. 1 4 Q. U S G C o r p o r a t i o n is the p a r e n t c o m p a n y of 1 5 U.S, Gypsum Company? 1 6 A . Yes. 1 7 Q. D u r i n g this p e r i o d of time, from 1977 1 8 until the present, you have not been engaged xn 1 9 p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e , is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 20 A. T h a t ' s c o r r e c t . 2 1 Q. Y o u are or h a v e b e e n a s a l a r i e d e m p l o y e e 22 of the c o m p a n y or the two companies.' 2 3 A . Yes. 24 i. I w a n t to s p e c i f i c a l l y a d d r e s s u 'ne p e r i o d ezf^ os.t.n & e.'icj a n d c z r f - t t o c i a U i ,O n e .. nr-__ net .... r>io) 7p5-pos7 6 1 1977 until the end of 1984 when you were a lawyer 2 with U.S. Gypsum Company. 3 W hat was your title or what were your 4 t i t l e s d u r i n g that p e r i o d of time? 5 A . During that p e r i o d of time, I held the 6 t i t l e of a t t o r n e y , sen i o r l i t i g a t i o n a t t o r n e y and 7 senior atto rney-1it i g a t i o n . 8 Q. Who did you r e p o r t to in t h o s e p o s i t i o n s ? 9 A. Thad Snell, g e n e r a l c o u n s e l . He held 1 O various titles also during that period. 1 1 Q. Did Mr. Snell later become vice p r e s i d e n t 1 2 of the c o m p a n y ? 1 3 A. I believe he was vice presi d e n t t h r o u g h o u t 1 4 that entire time. 1 5 q . Was Mr. Snell the senior attorney employed 1 6 by U.S. G y p s u m C o m p a n y t h r o u g h o u t th a t p e r i o d of 1 7 time? 1 8 A . Yes. 1 9 Q . D u r i n g t h a t p e r i o d of time, again, ' l l 20 u n t i l the end of 1984, did you ha v e any i n v o l v e m e n t 2 1 with asbestos litigation? 22 A . Yes. 2 3 Q. Would you d e s c r i b e to me g e n e r a l l y what 24 your involvement w a s . W0i <W/k, <zR o tE.ns.1^ a n d -llin vu e r2i2'7s?.-eos7 ,iJ n c . i 1 A . W h e n I s t a r t e d wi t h the c o m p a n y in 1977 , 2 t h e r e were a b o u t 12 r e l a t e d c a s e s in K n o x v i l l e i 3 called the Knoxville cases. 4 I was b r o u g h t into the c o m p a n y to work 5 with litigation liled against or on behalf of the 6 c o m p a n y , and t h e s e 12 c a s e s w e r e a s s i g n e d to me at 7 that time. 8 That number grew progressively over the 9 years and I ended up with i n v o l v e m e n t generally, 1 0 first e x c l u s i v e l y in the p e r s o n a l i n j u r y area, l a t e r 1 1 e x c l u s i v e l y or p r i m a r i l y in the p r o p e r t y d a m a g e 1 2 asbestos litigation. 1 3 Q. T h e 12 c a s e s f i l e d in K n o x v i l l e w e r e 1 4 personal injury cases? 1 5 A. Yes. 1 6 Q. T h o s e w o u l d be c a s e s in w h i c h s o m e b o d y 1 7 c l a i m e d to h a v e an a s b e s t o s d i s e a s e as a r e s u l t of 1 8 exposure to some U.S. G y p s u m p r o d u c t or produc t s ? 1 9 A . Yes. 20 Q. When did the change take place where your 2 1 involvement, primary involvement went from 22 oersonal injury l i t i g a t i o n to asbestos p r o p e r t y 23 damage cases? 2 4 A. The shift was in the fall of 1521. From Q V cffz, a n d c O j- L ic c ia tc t,O n e.. rffAnnU f312:7S2-S? 57 8 1 the p e r i o d Ju n e of 1980 u n t i l the fall of 1981, I i 2 was g e n e r a l l y involved with both. But I was out cn 3 m a t e r n i t y leave d u r i n g the s u m m e r of 1981, and upon 4 my return a numb e r of e v e n t s c o a l e s c e d and cau s e d me 5 to s p e n d the b u l k of my t i m e in the p r o p e r t y d a m a g e 6 area. 7 Q. By p r o p e r t y d a m a g e cases, are we r e f e r r i n g 8 to c a s e s f i l e d by b u i l d i n g o w n e r s such as s c h ool 9 d i s t r i c t s a g a i n s t U . S . G y p s u m C o m p a n y s e e k i n g cos .s 1O a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r e m o v a l of a s b e s t o s - c o n t a i n i n g 11 p r o d ucts? 1 2 A. That's an accurate c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , 1 3 a l t h o u g h at the time, all of the cases were b r o u g h t 1 4 cn beha l f of school d i s t r i c t s . 1 5 Q. Initially they were brought by school 1 6 districts arm later some nonschool districts brought 1 7 similar cases? 1 8 A. Thar's my understanding. That would have 1 9 occurred, I believe, after I no longer had 20 r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for t 're c a s e s . 2 1 Q . And when did that occur? 2 2 A . In Aug us t of 1984. 2 3 Q . N o w , in c o n n e c t i o n wit: your duties 1 2 4 ' regarding asbestos litigation, both personal 1 ^XVotfs., CnUaac and C (3 12} 732-3 237 ,O n e . 9 1 property damage, did you report to Mr. Snell? 2 A . Yes. 3 Q. He was your boss? 4 A . Yes. 5 Q. Would it be fair to say that you met 6 regularly with him concerning the asbestos cases, 7 often many times a day? 8 A. I met with him as f r e q u e n t l y as I felt the 9 situa t i o n required and s o metime s.^it was daily or ^ 1 0 several times during the day. Sometimes there would 1 1 be weeks in between. 1 2 Q. Are you familiar with a pub l i c a t i o n known 1 3 as the Asbestos L i tigation Reporter? 1 4 A.Yes,lam. - 1 5 Q. Can you describe generally what the 1 6 Asbestos L i t i g a t i o n Reporter is? ... 1 7 A. It is a p u b l i c a t i o n that comes out every 1 8 two weeks that purports to report on events 1 9 occurring in either the p e r s o n a l injury, the 20 p r o p e r t y damage or the a s b estos insurance - re x a e d _ 2 1 litigation. * 2 2 Q. Did you review the Asbestos L i t i g a t i o n 2 3 ReDorter while you were involved with the personal - 2 4 injury and property damage asbestos cases? ,, W M <W h 1 0 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Did you h a v e an o c c a s i o n in the late 1 9 7 0 s 3 to review the A s b estos L i t i g a t i o n Reporter which 4 reported on what has been g e n e r a l l y referred :o as 5 the Sumner Simpson papers? 6 A. it was b r o u g h t to my a t t e n t i o n . We were 7 not a s u b scribe r at that time. 8 Q. And did you at the time it was b r o u g h t to 9 y o u r a t t e n t i o n r e v i e w the p u b l i c a t i o n whe r e it 1 0 reported on the Sumner Simpson papers being located? 1 1 A. If y o u ' r e a s k i n g me did I read the p i e c e s 1 2 of p a p e r that t a l k e d a b o u t that that w e r e in the 1 3 Asbestos Litigation Reporter, yes, I did. 1 4 Q. Now, my u n d e r s t a n d i n g is that S u m n e r ,, 1 5 S i m p s o n w a s t h e p r e s i d e n t o f R a y b e s t o s Mar. n at tan. 1 6 back in the 1930s. Is t h a t also your u n d e r s t a n d i n g 1 7 a s we 11? - 1 8 A. Yes? 1 9 Q . And the Sumner papers included both 20 d o c u m e n t s a l l e g e d l y created by him and documents 2 1 allegedly created by one V a n d i v e r B rown of Johns ~ 2 2 M a n v i 11 e , is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 2 3 A . Yes. ' 2 4 Q Now, in c l u d e d in that list -- strike that. < zfxoi.e.n ijcxj a n J . c ^ J -iio c L a iz i, iJ n c . Cf-ucaao, O tiln c ii (212) 782-8087 1 1 1 Did you have an o p p o r t u n i t y at that time to review a A 2 m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t d a t e d N o v e m b e r 2C, 1936 3 p r i n t e d in the A s b e s t o s L i t i g a t i o n F e por ter? 4 A . Yes. 5 Q. I show you a copy of this document and ask 6 if that is a copy of the m e m o r a n d u m of agreement 7 that you reviewed in the late 1 9 7 0 s in the Aso^stos 8 Litigation Reporter? 9 A. I'm sorry, I started re ading. What was _ 10 thequestion? - 1 1 MR. SPEIGHTS: Read it back, please. 1 2 (WHEREUPON, the record was read 1 3 by the reporter as requested.) 1 4 MR. CALE: Is the q u e s t i o n whether the text -is 1 5 the same or whether this is a c t u a l l y the copy as' it 1 6 appeared in the L i t i g a t i o n Repor t e r ? 1 7 MR. SPEIGHTS: My u n d e r s t a n d i n g is nothing 1 8 appears e x a c t l y as is in the A s b e s t o s L i t i g a t i o n 1 9 Reporter because they have smaller print and tnev 20 but is this the text? . 2 1 BY THE WITNESS: 2 2 A . This is the text, and I bel ie v e the i 23 notations that are on these pieces of pap e r would - 2 4 not have appeared . r R V odfz, <zRoin.nijz.xc] a n d c R f a o c L z t z z , f j n c . Cfucaao. jJCUnoii 9 (3T2.'72-eOS" 1 2 1 BY MR. SP E I G H T S : . 2 Q. And which notations are you referring to? 3 A. T h e r e is a n u m b e r in the u p p e r r i g h t h a n d 4 corner 2-14, in the lower r i g h t h a n d corner, there 5 are various initials and numbers and the pages seem 6 to be i d e n t i f i e d as A, B and C. E a c h of the p a g e s 7 bears what appears to be a Bates number stamp. 8 Q. Except for that, the text of this would.be 9 i d e n t i c a l to what y o u re a d in the A s b e s t o s 10 L i t i g a t i o n R e p o r t e r ? 1 1 A. It conforms to my recoll e c t i o n , yes. 1 2 MR. SPEIGHTS: I would ask this document 1 3 p r e v i o u s l y m a r k e d as P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 214 be 1 4 m a r k e d as an e x h i b i t to th i s d e p o s i t i o n as . 1 5 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 1. 1 6 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 7 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n Ex nib it N o . 1, 1 8 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9-86.) 1 9 (WHEREUPON, d is cu s si o n was had 20 off the record.) 2 1 MR. CALE: Let the record reflect that the - 2 2 document that has now been mar k e d as p l a i n t i r r ' s 23 E x h i b i t No. 1 is not a copy of the m e m o r a n d u m of - 24 agreement as it appeared in the A s b e s t o s L i t i g a t i o n a n d czdJ-iocLatz,dJnc. dfiicaoo, dJCtinoii (312} 7*62-808 1 3 1 R e p o r t e r but, rather, a d o c u m e n t o b t a i n e d at some 2 other place at some other time. 3 But we a g r e e t h a t the t e x t of E x h i b i t 1 4 c o n f o r m s to the text of the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t 5 as it a p p e a r e d in t h e l i t i g a t i o n r e p o r t e r . Is t h a t 6 correct? 7 MR. SPEIGHTS: That's correct. And to avoid 8 any confusion, I will later forward counsel a copy 9 of the one th a t a c t u a l l y a p p e a r e d in the A s b e s t o s 1 0 L i t i g a t i o n Reporter, and we can discuss perhaps a 1 1 s u b s t i t u t i o n of that copy for this copy. 1 2 MR. CALE: That would be p e r f e c t l y agreeable. 1 3 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 4 Q. Ms. Torrey, would you agree with me tuat 1 5 the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t r e f l e c t s t h a t it was' 1 6 e x e c u t e d on b e h a l f of U n i t e d S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y 1 7 by a Mr. Shaver, s e c r e t a r y - t r e a s u r e r ? - 1 8 A. T h a t ' s w h a t a p p e a r s to be on t hat p i e c e of 1 9 paper, yes. 20 Q. Would you agree with me that the a g r e e m e n t 2 1 reflects that those people who signed the agreement 2 2 a g r e e d to f u n d c e r t a i n a n i m a l e x p e r i m e n t s wir.i 23 a s b e s t o s dust to be p e r f o r m e d by Dr. LeRoy G a r d n e r ' 2 4 at S a r a n a c La k e L a b o r a t o r y in N e w Y c rk ? T 1 4 1 MR. CALE: I'm going to object to that qu e s t i o n f 2 o n l y i n s o f a r as it is not a l l - i n c l u s i v e . O b v i o u s l y , 3 the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t first of all says that 4 it is p u r s u a n t to a m e e t i n g of b r ake lining 5 m a n u f a c t u r e r s of w h i c h U.S. G y p s u m was never a bra k e 6 lining manufacturer. 7 It says t h a t it is to be a t h r e e - y e a r 8 study and a lot of other things w hich o b v i o u s l y we 9 think are material and important and I object t o a 1 O q u e s t i o n that only f o c u s e s on a few of the 1 1 a t t r i b u t e s that p e r h a p s are o b v i o u s l y of i n t e r e s t to 12 you. 1 3 If we can, p e r h a p s let the d o c u m e n t speak 1 4 for i t s e l f or in some o t h e r way try to get at what 1 5 you would like to have the witness testify to. B "t 1 6 I w o u l d not wa n t to ha v e an i n c o r r e c t or i n c o m p l e t e 1 7 c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of the d o c u m e n t in a d e p o s i t i o n 1 8 fo r m w h e r e you w o u l d s i m p l y ask her to a g r e e to it 1 9 unless you then want me on cro s s i n g into the otner 20 a s p e c t s of it. I w o u l d be w i l l i n g to w o r k t h a t any 2 1 w a y yo u t h i n k is r e a s o n a b l e . 22 MR. SPEIGHTS: I will be glad to rephrase the 2 3 question but I think you may have to go back and - 24 cross to try to ciar ify w h a t e v e r points you need ;o WM n vo C ft, z J x 'o z z n iJ s .'Uj a n d < zrJ -i.zo c L a .tzt, O n e . 70, ttln a e (212) 72-eCB7 1 5 1 clarify. 2 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 3 Q. Ms. Torrey, would you agree with me that 4 the m e mo ra nd um of agreement, among other things, 5 provides that the sponsors will fund certain animal 6 e x p e r i m e n t s with asbestos dust to be p e r f o r m e d by 7 Dr. L e R o y G a r d n e r of S a r a n a c Lake, N e w York? 8 A. The d o c u m e n t on its face says "The ` 9 undersigned hereby agree to underwrite certain 1 0 e x p e r i m e n t s w i t h a s b e s t o s d ust to be c o n d u c t e d by 1 1 Dr. L e R o y U. G a r d n e r at t h e S a r a n a c L a b o r a t o r i e s , 1 2 Saranac Lake, New York." 1 3 I d o n't see a reference to animal 1 4 expe riments. 1 5 Q. W e r e t h e r e o t h e r r e f e r e n c e s in the ' 16 Asbestos L i tigation Reporter which reflected that 1 7 t n e s e w e r e in f a c t a n i m a l s t u d i e s to be p e r f o r m e d by 1 8 Dr. Gardner? 1 9 A. At any time or at the same tim e ? In the 20 Litigation Reporter? . 2 1 Q. D u r i n g the p e r i o d in the late 1970s, dia 22 the Asbestos Litigation Reporter actually publisn 2 3 three progress reports c o n d u c t e d pursuant to this ' 24 a g r e e m e n t w h i c h r e f l e c t e d t h a t t h e y were in fact r c z f d o z z n b z z j a n d cd~ lt z o c i a t z i ., dJnc. dJCCinois. ft (312)TSP-8QS7 1 6 1 2 3 4 . 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 23 2 4 animal experiments? ~ A. There was published in A s b e s t o s ' r Litigation Reporter to my recollection three progress reports a l l of a n i m a l e x p e r i m e n t w o r k w i t h a s b e s t o s d o n e a t_ S a r anac Lake L a b o r a t o r i e s by Dr. Gardner. W h e t h e r t h o s e d o c u m e n t s r e f l e c t in the r e p o r t e r t h a t it was the r e s u l t of t he m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t , I s i m p l y d o n ' t r e c a l l one way or the - othe r . I d o n ' t r e call the s p e c i f i c r e c o r d i n g of the thr e e p r o g r e s s r e p orts and w h e t h e r or not they . r e f e r e n c e d b a c k to the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t . Q. I u n d e r s t a n d . F r o m your r e v i e w of the various progress reports and the other c o r r e s p o n d e n c e p r o d u c e d in c o n n e c t i o n with the S u m n e r S i m p s o n p a p e r s and from your re v i e w of ' various U.S. Gypsum Company documents and/or d o c u m e n t s of the law firm w h i c h r e p r e s e n t e d U.S.- Gyps u m over the years, would you agree with me that this agreement funded experiments with animal e x p e r i m e n t s w i t h a s b e s t o s d u s t and a n i m a l s ? Do w.e have any dispute about that, Ms. Tcrrey? A. I'm having trouble with the way you're wording the question. Q. L e t me t r y it a g a i n . , ' * c^Roi.c.nijz'U] a n d f.Uaoo, ttir.oU (312) 7<62-S087 , dJnc. 1 7 1 A . Thank you. 2 Q. I'm a s k i n g you now, in 1986, w o u l d you 3 a g r e e wi t h me fr o m your r e v i e w of v a r i o u s d o c u m e n t s 4 s i n c e you first saw the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t , 5 t h a t the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t did in fact fund 6 e x p e r i m e n t s with a s b e s t o s dust on a n i m a l s ? 7 MR. CALE: Let's go off the record for a moment. 8 (WHEREUPON, discussion was had - 9 off the record between the witness 1 0 and Mr. Cale , out of the . 1 1 hearing of other counsel and the 1 2 court reporter.) 1 3 MR. SPEIGHTS: Let me rephrase the question. 1 4 MR. CALE: Why don't you do that. - 1 5 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: ' 1 6 q . Ms. Tcrrey, would you agree with me that 1 7 the e x p e r i m e n t s w i t h a s b e s t o s d u s t to be c o n d u c t e d 1 8 by Dr. G a r d n e r r e f e r r e d to in P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 1, 1 9 the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t , i n c l u d e d a n i m a l 20 experiments? . 2 1 A . Yes, as I now know today. * 22 Q. As you now know today? 2 3 A . Yes. _ 2 4 Q. Now, upon reviewing the memoranaum or r \W?A < W /2 and cjdaacLatzi, jjnc. C kiCQ.QO, U ttin o U (3-,2)?2-8087 1 8 1 a g r e e m e n t , did you d i s c u s s it w i t h Mr S n e l l ? 2 A. I b r o u g h t it to h i s a t t e n t i o n s o m e t i m e 3 a f t e r it was b r o u g h t to my a t t e n t i o n . 4 Q. W a s Mr. S h a v e r in fact s e c r e t a r y - t r e a s u r e r 5 of U.S. G y p s u m C o m p a n y b a c k d u r i n g that p e r i o d of 6 t ime ? 7 A. That's my understanding, yes. 8 Q. And was Mr. Shaver later either Chairman 9 of t h e B o a r d or P r e s i d e n t of U .S^. G y p s u m C o m p a n y ? 1 0 A . Ye s . - 1 1 Q. And at that time, did M r . Shaver still 1 2 m a i n t a i n an office at the c o r p o r a t e h e a d q u a r t e r s at 1 3 101 S o u t h W a c k e r , a l b e i t he w a s r e t i r e d ? 1 4 A. I ' m s o r r y , at w h a t t i m e ? 1 5 Q. At t h e t i m e t h a t y o u f i r s t sa w the ' 16 m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t and the time you d i s c u s s e d 1 7 it w i t h Mr. S n e l l . ` 1 8 A And the q u e s t i o n is did ne m a i n t a i n an 1 9 office 20 Q Did Mr. S h a v e r s t i l l m a i n t a i n an office, at 2 1 101 S o u t h W a c k e r that t ime ? 2 2 A. I b e l i e v e he had the use of an o f f i c e he r e 23 W n e t h e r t h a t ' s m a i n t a i n i n g an of f i c e I'm net surer 2 4 Q. W o u l d it be a fair s t a t e m to sa" than 1 9 1 :he m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t t h a t you read in the 2 Asbestos L i t i g a t i o n R e p o r t e r and s h a r e d with Mr . 3 Snell was of int e r e s t to you and Mr. Snell? 4 MR. CALE: I think you can go ahead and answer 5 that one . 6 BY TH E W I T N E S S : 7 A . Yes. 8 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: - 9 Q. Was any a t t e m p t made to i n t e r v i e w Mr. 1 0 S h a v e r to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h a t w a s ii s s i g n a t u r e 1 1 on the m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t ? 1 2 MR. CALE: I'm going to object to that question 1 3 so we have a record here to the e x t e n t that any 1 4 k n o w l e d g e t h a t the w i t n e s s has is b a s e d on h e a r s a y 1 5 or the a c t i v i t i e s of o t h e r p e o p l e . ' 1 6 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 7 Q . Did you subsequently have a conversation 1 8 w i t h M r . Snell, vice p r e s i d e n t of U.S. G y p s u m 1 9 C o m p a n y , c o n c e r n i n g an i n t e r v i e w he had witn Mr. 20 Shaver? 2 1 A . Yes. 2 2 Q . Did Mr. Snell advise you that Mr. Shaver 2 3 s t a t e d t h a t t h e s i g n a t u r e or. the m e m o r a n d u m of _ 2 a g r e e m e n t a p p e a r e d to be his? T \W//A < W / , an A y iio e ia tz i, Jnc. C L CCLOf O ttincU * (312)782-8087 20 1 A . Yes. 2 Q. Did that interview occur during that 3 g e n eral period of time 1979 to 1980? 4 A. Yes. I was also informed Mr. Shaver had 5 no r e c o l l e c t i o n of the c o n t e n t s of the m e m o r a n d u m of 6 a g r e e m e n t or of the s t u d y it p u r p o r t e d to fund 7 Q. Did you also b e c o m e aware that Dr. G a r d n e r 8 pre p a r e d a m o n o g r a p h on his study in the year 1943? 9 A. I'm sorry, what's the q u e s t i o n ? 1 O Q. Did you become aware that Dr. Gardner 11 published a monograph concerning his experiments, 1 2 animal experiments with asbestos dust m 1943? 1 3 A . No . 1 4 Q. Have you ever s e e n a co p y of Dr. G a r d n e r ' s 1 5 1943 monog raph? ' 1 6 A. No. .. 1 7 Q. Has anyo n e a d v i s e d you that Dr. G a r d n e r 1 8 f o u n d in his a n i m a l e x p e r i m e n t s t h a t c e r t a i n a n i m a l s 1 9 s u b j e c t to the e x p e r i m e n t s wi th a s b e s t o s d u s t wer e 20 d y ing of lung c a n c e r ? 2 1 A . No . 22 Q . And th a t is t r u e ev en t o d a y ? 23 A . T h a t 's c o r r e c t . - 2 4 Q. Did you a s c e n d the L e x i n g t o n tri a l in , ^WoCfz., czf^oie.nijz.'icj a ru l z r f-o c ia tz ., j j n e . Chicago. U t t i n o U (312) 7e 2-BC 7 2 1 1 April of 1984? A 2 A . Yes. 3 Q. Ms. Torrey, shortly after you read the 4 m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t in the A s b e s t o s L i t i g a t i o n 5 R e p o r t e r , my u n d e r s t a n d i n g is t h a t D o n n a W o o d r u f f , a 6 p a r a l e g a l wor k in g for you, l ocated some d o c u m e n t s at 7 1C 1 S o u t h W a c k e r , is that c o r r e c t ? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Do you recall when that was that she 1 0 located these documents? 1 1 A. She was w o r k i n g on a p r o j e c t for me to 1 2 gather some old releases unrelated to asbestos just 1 3 for g e n e r a l p r o d u c t l i a b i l i t y q u e s t i o n s , and in 1 4 J a n u a r y of 1980 came upon some boxe s . 1 5 Q. W h e r e were t h o s e d o c u m e n t s or tho s e boxes 1 6 found? ... 1 7 A. S h e i n f o r m e d me c h a t she f o u n d t h e m i n a 1 8 room located a d j acent to the file room. 1 9 Q. And, again, that would have been at the 20 c o r p o r a t e h e a d q u a r t e r s at 101 S o u t h W a c k e r ? , 2 1 A. That's correct. * 2 2 Q. And at that time, was your office located 2 3 at 101 S o u t h '/'acker? ' 24 A. Yes. , WM n v o C f i, zfx>oi..nij.Xj c m d Ckicexao, ^JCCinoLi. O (312, 782-8087 ,O n e . 22 1 Q. A n d was Mr. S n e l l ' s o f f i c e l o c a t e d at 101 A 2 South Wacker? 3 A . Yes. 4 Q. Did Ms. W o o d r u f f bring you any d o c u r e n t s 5 from the box or boxes she l o cated? 6 A . Yes. 7 Q. Did you ever go down to the storage room 8 and r e v i e w the boxes t h e m s e l v e s in the sto r a g e room? 9 A. No. ^ 1 0 Q. Now, I understand that Ms. Woodruff 1 1 bro u g h t you at least three d o c uments, would you 12 agree with that? 1 3 A. Yes, in the m a n i l a f o l d e r s in w h i c h she 1 4 found them. - 1 5 Q. I s how you a copy of what p r e v i o u s l y has 1 6 b e e n m a r k e d P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 20 and on another, 1 7 c o p y P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 1694 an d ask if t h a t i s one 1 8 of the d o c u m e n t s w h i c h she b r o u g h t to you? 1 9 A. It c o n f o r m s to my r e c o l l e c t i o n . 20 MR. S P E I G H T S : I w o u l d a s k t h a t be m a r k e d as. 2 1 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 2. ~ 2 2 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 23 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No. 2 , 2 4 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7-29-86..' W M V o l f t :, c O y o i c n i f c x o a n d C P ~ f i . i o c i a . t c i ., O n e . Ck.cQ.Qc Ckkir.oii. c (3*2 82-8087 23 1 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: - t 2 Q. Ms. T o r r e y , P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 2 is a 3 letter from Vandiver Brown to J.S. Offut, and across 4 the top it r e f l e c t s J o h n s - M a n v i l l e C o r p o r a t i o n w i t h 5 the New York address. 6 Is this the V a n d i v e r B r o w n or at lea s t the 7 same name V a n d i v e r Brown that we referred to e a r l i e r 8 as being g eneral a t t o r n e y for J o h n s - M a n v i l l e - 9 Corporation? v _ 1 0 MR. CALE: Before the witness answers, I have 11 to o b j e c t to you r c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of wha t thi s 1 2 d o c u m e n t is. 1 3 As the d o c ument shows, it is a copy 1 4 o b v i o u s l y typed on someone's typewriter, not on the 1 5 let t e r h e a d s t a t i o n e r y of J o h n s - M a n v i l l e C o r p o r a t i o n , 1 6 and it app ears at least to me to be some typist's. 1 7 rendi t io n made with a t y p e w r i t e r of some d o cument 1 8 that we do not have . 1 9 If you wi l l a g r e e w i t h that 20 c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n as o p p o s e d to the one that I t h i n k 2 1 you gave w h i c h is this is a c o p y of a letter w h i c h 22 suggests that it's on original stationery, I think 2 3 she can a n s w e r the q u e s t i o n or have it speak for^ - 24 i t s e l f . * W 0 A ^Woifz, and c^dfiiociatzi.,One. Okizcwo, DtL-.oii e (312:7?- 5087 2 4 1 MR. S P E I G H T S : I'll c h o o s e none of t h o s e three, 2 a Ite rnat ive s . 3 BY MR. SPEIGhTS : 4 Q. Ms. T o r r e y , w h a t is t h a t d o c u m e n t , 5 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 2? 6 A. I ' m not s u r e h o w it if y o u w a n t me to 7 a n s w e r t h a t . W h a t do y o u m e a n w h a t is it? 8 Q. W o u l d you d e s c r i b e w h a t t h a t d o c u m e n t is, 9 please? 1 0 A. This d o c u m e n t to me a p p e a r s to be a typed 1 1 re n d i t i o n , to use Mr. C a l e ' s word, of a letter. It 1 2 is not the o r i g i n a l . It has i n s t e a d of l e t t e r h e a d 1 3 the name u o h n s - M a n v i l l e t y p e d on it. 1 4 It bea r s the wo r d "Copy" on the top w h i c h 1 5 it's my understanding was a commonly used method'cf 1 6 m a k i n g a c o p y of a d o c u m e n t b e f o r e t h e r e w ere 1 7 photocopy machines available. i 8 It is f r c m an i n d i v i d u a l w h o s e n a m e 1 9 a p p e a r s to be V a n d i v e r B r o w n i d e n t i f i e d as g e n e r a l 2 0 a t t o r n e y . It is a d d r e s s e d to J.S. O f f u t , a s s i s t a n t 2 1 to the president, United States Gypsum Company wifh 2 2 an a d d r e s s , re Dr. G a r d n e r - a s b e s t o s d u s t e x p e r i m e n t , 23 ar.d it r e a d s , " R e p l y i n g f u r t h e r to y o u r s of A p r i l 1-9, 2 4 "9 3 7 , . I am e n c l o s i n g h e r e w i t h c o p y of Dr. G a r d n e r ' s Q i'oifz, a n d <zdJ-i.LocLa.tzi, Q>n c . C.nLcaoo, DtL-.di G (312) 722-2321 25 1 f i r s t p r o g r e s s r e p o r t d a t e d M a y 5, 1 9 3 7 . " - 2 I can o n l y s t a t e to y o u w h a t it s ays on 3 the letter. 4 Q. Thank you. Now, I next show you this 5 d o c u m e n t and a sk if t h i s is a l s o one of the 6 d o c u m e n t s w h i c h you w e r e s h o w n by Ms. W o o d r u f f in 7 e a rly '80? 8 A. It a p p e a r s to be the same d o c u m e n t . I 9 h a v e n ' t c o m p a r e d it wo r d for word. I w o u l d p ointy 1 0 o u t t h e s e a r e p h o t o c o p i e s . T h e o n e I h a d w a s a .. 11 tissue copy. 1 2 That document also bears the word "Copy" I 3 on the top and, again, I would assume someone has 1 4 retyped that from something else. - 1 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: I would ask that that d o c u m e n t 1 6 be m a r k e d as P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 3. .. 1 7 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 8 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No. 3, 1 9 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 20 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: . 2 1 Q. W h a t is the t i t l e of t h a t d o c u m e n t and the 22 dat e of it, p l e a s e ? 2 3 A. It s t a t e s " F i r s t P r o g r e s s Re porn on _ ' 2 4 A s b e s t o s i s E x p e r i m e n t s at the S a r a n a c L a o o r a t e r y , ^ ^ W offz, / CUlA CzQ i.i>C.i a t z i .,/Jtc. ** CdicaQO, ^ [ [ i n o i t t- (312) 762- ~037 2 ' 1 M a y 5, 1 9 3 7 . " t 2 Q. N o w , is it my u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t the 3 copies which Ms. W o o d r u f f showed you of P l a i n t i f f ' s 4 E x h i b i t 2, t h e l e t t e r f r o m V a n d i v e r B r o w n to J.S. 5 O f f u t t a n d P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 3, t h e f i r s t p r o g r e s s 6 report, were tissue copies? 7 A . Correct. 8 Q. Next I'm going to show you a d ocumen t Q w h i c h has b e e n p r e v i o u s l y m a r k e d ^ a s 1693 and ask if 1 0 you can identify -- I'm not asking for a description 11 yet, but just if you r e c o g n i z e t h a t d o c u m e n t ? 1 2 A. I have seen this document. 1 3 MR. SPEIGHTS: I'm going to ask that be m a r k e d 1 4 as P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 4, l e t t e r f r o m J . S . Offutt- to 1 5 G . G . K i n g d a t e d M a y 5, 1 9 3 7 . ' 1 6 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 7 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No.- 4, 1 8 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 1 9 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 2 0 Q. Y o u are a w a r e , Ms. T o r r e y , t h a t Mr. S m i t h 2 1 has t e s t i f i e d that this d o c u m e n t was also l o c a t e d k)y 2 2 Ms. W o o d r u f f in 1 9 8 0 ? 23 A. I h a v e n ' t read Mr. S m i t h ' s d e p o s i t i o n i n 24 I some time. I d o n ' t k n o w if t h a t ' s wh a t ne testirj.ec j Q V oifz, an d crj-itociaU i., jjn c . C n ic a a o , O i L n o i i ft (312) 7S2-BCB7 2 7 1 to or n o t . ' t 2 Q. As I understand your recollection, you . 3 d o n ' t k n o w w h e t h e r this d o c u m e n t was l o c a t e d in 1980 4 or 1984? 5 A . That's correc t . 6 Q. Okay. Would you d e s c r i b e this document to 7 m e , please? 8 A. It is a letter from J.S. Offutt identified 9 as a s s i s t a n t to the president, addressed to Mr. G.D. 10 King, research manager, B.M.R. Laboratories, Chicago, 1 1 attention Mr. C.C. Scheutz. 1 2 Do you want me to read the body of the i 3 letter? 1 4 Q. if you would. > 1 5 A. "The Saranac Laboratory of Saranac, New 1 6 York is mak i n g a t h r e e - y e a r study of asbestosis. 1 7 They are i n v e s t i g a t i n g in p a r t i c u l a r the effect o_n 1 3 guinea pigs of breathing asbestos dust. 1 9 We u n d erstand that the dust being used is 20 composed of pure fibrous asrestos free from all 2 1 ser p e n t i n e rock and other foreign particles, grourto 22 as fine as p o s sible anc then ball milled. It is I 2 3 supplied by J o h n s-M a n v i 1 1 e from the 24 in the Danville section of the province of Quebec. WMA Q V o ffs, crO o i-znijcxej a n d c O fiio c L a iti,O n e . dnicaoc . OtiLnoLi t 0 1 2 ) 72S^S7 28 1 In order that we can i n t e r p r e t r e s u l t s . A 2 obtained, we would a p p r e c i a t e your advising us if 3 the various types of asbestos we use would vary in 4 c h e mical co m p o s i t i o n or physical c h a r a c t e r s t i c s when 5 ground and ball milled from the Johns-Manville 6 asb e s t o s being used in this i n v e s t i g a t i o n . " 7 Q. A n d t h a t l e t t e r , I b e l i e v e , is on U n i t e d 8 States Gypsum Company letterhead? - 9 A. Yes. It also has the t y p e d c.c . s on here, 1 0 and I seem to recall that other copies I have seen 1 1 had a check mark by the c.c., and there are file 1 2 notations on there inconsistent with United States 1 3 Gypsum Company filing systems. 1 4 Q. I next show you a document which has been 1 5 previ ously marked P l ai n tif f' s Exhibit 1698 and ask 1 6 if t h a t is one of t h e d o c u m e n t s w h i c h Ms. W o o d r u f f 1 7 shewed you in ear l y 198C? - 1 8 A. A g a i n , w i t h o u t r e a d i n g it t h r o u g h w o r d by 1 9 w o r d , it is a r e p o r t of d u s t s u r v e y at N a t i o n a l 20 A s b e s t o s C o m p a n y p l a n t of U n i t e d States G y p s u m Cc. 2 1 at J e r s e y C i t y , N e w J e r s e y , and I a s s u m e it is w h a t 22 have been r e f e r r i n g t 0 as the J e r s e y City study 2 3 tha t was s h o w n t c me by D o n n a W o o d r u f f in 1 9 80.- 2 4 MR . SPE IG H T S : I ask t h a t be m a r k e d as r a n d c zd j-iio c ia tzi., O n e.. Ohicac. o, jOflinoii. O {312) 762-8087 29 1 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 5. A 2 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 3 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h : b i t No. 5, 4 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 5 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 6 Q. W h a t is the d a t e of the J e r s e y C i t y s t u d y , 7 M s . To r rey? 8 A. It states, m ade by the S a r a n a c l a b o r a t o r y 9 M a y 25 t h r o u g h J u n e 2, 1 9 3 6 . R e c e i v e d J u l y 31, 19 36. 1 0 I notice stapled to this are some other 1 1 materials that are not the Jersey City study. 1 2 MR. SPEIGHTS: Let's delete those. 1 3 MR. C A L E : S u r e . 1 4 MR. SPEIGHTS: Let's go off the record. 1 5 (WHEREUPON, discussion was had ' 1 6 off the record.) . 1 7 BY MR. S P E IGHTS: 1 8 Q. Ms. T o r r e y , w o u l d you agree with me that 1 9 this study r e f l e c t s a s t udy by Dr. G a r d n e r in 1935 20 of a plant f o r m e r l y owned by N a t i o n a l A s b e s t o s . 2 1 C o m p a n y , the a s s e t s of w h i c h were p u r c h a s e d cy 22 United States Gypsum Company? 2 3 A . Ye s . _ ' 2 4 Q. Did Dr. Gardner find -- v HjHUbk. O V o fre, <zJx>oie.n(jt.xc] an d. c ^ d i i a c i a i z i , )-. (2fliCC.OO, fliil 1.01 (212) 30 1 A. E x c u s e me. Some of the a s s e t s of w h i c h . t 2 w e r e p u r c h a s e d . I d o n ' t k n o w if it was all of t h e 3 assets . 4 Q. Did Dr. G a r d n e r r e p o r t in t h i s s t u d y t h a t 5 the r e were cases of a s b e s t o s i s at this pl a n t ? 6 A. I h a v e n ' t read th a t s t u d y in a long time. 7 If you wan t , I'm g o i n g to h a v e to read it and find 8 it. If y o u w a n t to p o i n t it out to me, I c a n a g r e e o w i t h y o u t h a t t h a t ' s w h a t it say.s in t h e r e . __ 1 0 Q. L e t me do it thi s way. I'm g o i n g to s h o w 1 1 you a n o t h e r d o c u m e n t p r e v i o u s l y m a r k e d as 1 2 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 1697 and a s k if y o u are f a m i l i a r 1 3 with that document? 1 4 A. I have seen this document. 1 5 MR. S P E I G H T S : I'm g o ing to ask that be m a r k e d 1 6 as P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t No. 6. ... 1 7 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 8 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No. 6, 1 9 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 20 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: , 2 1 Q. I ' m g o i n g to s h o w y o u a n o t h e r d o c u m e n t riot 22 p r e v i o u s l y m a r k e d and ask if you are f a m i l i a r with 2 3 that document? 2 4 A. I'm familiar g e ne r al ly with the contents ^VoCf-z, a n d czd fiio c L a tzi.,O n e . d n l z a a o , dJ[[in cit (312) 72-St o/ 3 1 1 of the l e t t e r . W h e t h e r or not I h a v e in fact seen A 2 t h e l e t t e r b e f o r e , I d o n 't k n o w . 3 MR. S P E I G H T S : I 'm g o i n g to a s k t h a t t h a t 4 l e t t e r be m a r k e d as P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 7. 5 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 6 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No. 7, 7 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 8 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 9 Q. Now, to r e v i e w w h e r e we are on the J e r s e y 1 0 C i t y report, E x h i b i t 5 is the J e r s e y City r e p ort 1 1 itself pre p a r e d by Dr. G a r d n e r which was shown o 1 2 you by Ms. W o o d r u f f in 1980? 1 3 A . Correct. 1 4 q . E x h i b i t 6 is a l e t t e r f r o m G e n e r a l S e r v i c e 5 M a n a g e r , who I b e l i e v e e v e r y o n e a g r e e s was Mr. 1 6 P a r r i s h at t h a t t i m e , to W . L . R e a d y , cf A u g u s t 13., 1 7 1936 which summarizes that report? - 1 8 I- in p a r t a p p e a r s to s u m m a r i z e t h e r e p o r t . 1 9 Q. A n d P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 7, a l e t t e r f r o m 20 Mr. Par r i sl t c the l a w f i r m of S c o t t M a c L e ish & F.alk 2 1 d a t e d A ug u s t 17, 1936, f o r w a r d s a c o p y of t h e ~ 2 2 s umm a ry ana rep o r t t 0 th a t law firm? 2 3 A . In part, it f c r w a r c s a c o p y of t hat, yes 2 4 Q. An G Si S O c o m m e n t s on the report itself?, \Wi (IrV c fU , Chicago, and OLlincii c d f i i v c u i U i ,jO n e . (312j 762-8C'z 33 1 not possible from their findings to establish the 2 m a x i m u m safe c o n c e n t r a t i o n of a s b e s t o s dust in the 3 air." 4 Q. To review because I may have confused the 5 record, what you ackn o w l e d g e that Ms. Woodruff 6 s h o w e d you in e a r l y 1980 was the l e t t e r from 7 V a n d i v e r B rown to J .S . Off u t t , the first p r o g r s s 8 report on a s b e s t o s i s e x p e r i m e n t s at the S a r a n a c 9 laboratory and the Jersey City report, those thr e 0 1 0 d o c u m e n t s h a v i n g b e e n m a r k e d as P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 1 1 2, 3 and 5? 1 2 A. Than 's cor rect . 1 3 Q. Now, when you reviewed the documents, aid 1 4 you d i s c u s s t h e m w i t h Mr. S n e l l or s h o r t l y 1 5 thereafter? ' 1 6 A . I s h e w e d t h e m to him. I d o n ' t k n o w if,.we 1 7 d i s c u s s e d them as such. 1 8 Q. You don't know whether you discussed the 1 S details with him but you certainly discussed the 20 fact that the documents had been located with him? 2 1 A. 1 w o u l d c h a r a c t e r i z e it t h a t I b r o u g h t Co 22 his attention that I had been shown these documents. - jI 2 3 Q. And vou showed him the documents? " j 2 4 A. That's correct. , ' W M a Ulc/yT, a n d zd fiio cL a tei, O n e. ,n '.caac Sdlmoii (3:2; 72-80S7 32 1 A. I'm not sure if c o m m e n t s on the r e p o r t is t 2 an a c c u r a t e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n , but I won't argue with 3 it . 4 Q. Now, would you read for me the first two 5 p a r a g r a p h s on the l e t t e r to Mr. R e a d y s u m m a r i z i n g in 6 part the Jersey City report? 7 A. The first two paragraphs? 8 <2 . Y e s . 9 A. "We have a c o m p r e hensive report of dust 1 0 c o n d i t i o n s in our J e r s e y C i t y p l a n t and a r e p o r t on 1 1 the x-rays of the e m p l o y e e s examined at that plant 1 2 by Dr. G a r d n e r ' s o r g a nization. 1 3 in brief, the findings are: 1 4 1. Diagnosis of a s b e s t o s i s for f i v e 1 5 men. 1 6 2. P o s s i b l y five a d d i t i o n a l m e n h a v e 1 7 a s b e s t o s i s but n e c e s s a r y to . 1 8 confirm by clinical correlation. 1 9 3. S e r i o u s a s b e s t o s d u s t ha z a r d 20 under present operations." 2 1 Q. Now, I'm going to refer back co t r.e rep or t 2 2 itself w h ic h *'.s. W o o d r u f f s h o w e d you in 1930 and ask 23 you to read on page 4 the ne x t co tne lasc p a r ag r ^ on 2 4 ri *m he authors of the reoorc " conc.ude it is r Q V o ifz, and iio c ia tz i, iJ n c. (2fiLcaao, O iiin o ii (312) 72-80z7 34 1 Q. And that was s o m e t i m e in e a r l y 1980? . C 2 A . Yes . 3 Q. I understand Mr. Snell made a decision 4 c o n c e r n i n g t h e s e d o c u m e n t s at t h a t tim e , is t h a t 5 correct? 6 A. Are you going to to ask me what the 7 decision is? Otherwise, I can't answer your 8 q u e s t i o n e x a c t l y the way y o u ' v e p o s e d it. 9 Q. On th a t o c c a s i o n in e a r l y 1980, did Mr . 1 0 S n e l l m a k e a d e c i s i o n t h a t t h e s e d o c u m e n t s w o u l d ..not 1 1 be p r o d u c e d or r e v e a l e d in r e s p o n s e to d i s c o v e r y in 1 2 the asbestos cases? 1 3 A. Mr. Snell made a d e te rm i na ti o n -- strike 1 4 that. Mr. Snell made a d e c i s i o n that United States 1 5 G y p s u m C o m p a n y w o u l d r e s p o n d in d i s c o v e r y to t h e - 1 6 e x t e n t of d o c u m e n t s w h i c h w ere U n i t e d States Gyps.um 1 7 C o m p a n y d ocument s a n d , the re f o re , we re deemed 1 8 v e r i f i e d .or w i t h r e s p e c t no i n f o r m a t i o n l e a r n e d 1 9 c u r r e n t or f o r m e r U n i t e d St ates G y p s u m C o m p a n y 20 employees. 2 1 It was his o p i n i o n u p o n r e v i e w of t h e s e ~ 22 d o c u m e n t s th a t none of t h e s e t h r e e d o c u m e n t s were 23 U n i t e d S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y d o c u m e n t s m a i n t = i n e d i*n 24 t h e o r d i n a r y c o u r s e of b u s i n e s s b y U n i t e d St a n A c y ^ tto c L a tc t,j j n c . (2fiica3ot f j i i i n o i t 6 (312} 732-c OB? 3 5 1 G y p s u m C o m p a n y and, f u r t h e r , t h a t in his o p i n i o n , 2 t h e y were d o c u m e n t s of the Keck law firm. Since these were not United States Gypsum 4 Co m p a n y documents, they were not responsive to b d i s c o v e r y rec j e s t s in a s b e s t o s l i t i g a t i o n . V I think to make the answer complete, I 7 s h o u l d a lso p o i n t cut t h a t the q u e s t i o n of v e r i f y i n g 8 was the critical issue and that an attempt was made 9 to v e r i f y the i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t a i n e d in t h e s e __ 1 0 documents through United States Gypsum Company 1 1 s o u r c e s , e i t h e r t h r o u g h d o c u m e n t s that were c-.xted 1 2 S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y d o c u m e n t s or t h r o u g h c u r r e n t 1 3 or f o r m e r U n i t e d S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y e m p l o y e e s . 1 4 And in t h a t r e gard, we u n d e r t o o k a r a t h e r 1 5 e x t e n s i v e s e a r c h for i n f o r m a t i o n from, w h i c h to 1 6 ve r i f y the contents of these three documents. 1 7 Q. Ms. Tcrrey, because you are a lawyer, I 1 8 think you have moved to my second and third 1 9 questions, and my first q u e s t i o n was simply was Mr. 20 Snell's bottom line d ecision that these documents., 2 1 a b s e n t s o m e t h i n g else, w o u l d not be p r o d u c e d in * 22 r e s p o n s e to d i s c o v e r y in the p e r s o n a l i n j u r y or 2 3 property damage litigation? _ 2 4 I c a n ' t c h a r a c t e r i z e it t h a t way. It w ~ 36 1 his judgment that the docum e n t s responsive to . t 2 d i s c o v e r y w o uld be Unit e d S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y 3 d o c u m e n t s , and it was his o p i n i o n t h a t t h e s e die not 4 fall in t h a t c a t e g o r y . T h e r e f o r e , t h e y were not 5 produced . 6 q . As a r e s u l t of t h a t m e e t i n g w i t h Mr. Sn e l l , 7 was it u n d e r s t o o d t h a t t h e s e d o c u m e n t s , P l a i n t i f f ' s 8 E x h i b i t s 2, 3 a n d 5, w o u l d n o t be p r o d u c e d in - 9 response to discovery m the asbestos litigation _ 1 O absent some orher documentation? . 1 1 A . What was the first part of that q u e s t i o n ? 1 2 MR . S P E I G H T S : R e a d it b a c k , p l e a s e . 1 3 (WHEREUPON, the record was read 1 4 by the r e p o r t e r as r e q u e s t e d . ) 1 5 BY THE WITNESS: 1 6 A. I ' m s o r r y . T h e o n l y w a y I c a n s t a t e i a., 1 7 Mr. S p e i g h t s , is t h a t to the e x t e n t a n y t h i n g was - 1 8 unde r s t o o d at th a t t i m e , what was u n d e r s t o o d 1 9 that in Mr. Sne l l ' s ju d g m e n t , the d o c u m e n t s 2 O w e r e r e q u i r e d to be p r o d u c e d in t he a s b e s t o s 2 1 litigation were United States Gyosum Company 2 2 d o c urne n t s o r i n f o r m t ion ac qu ired f r o m c ,, re n t or 23 f o r m e r Un ited ". ates G y p s u m C om p a n y empl o y e e ~ . _ - 2 4 In w as his o p i n i o n t h a t these docu-enos^. n lo ffi, e z R o ie .n C -e .r j <xnA c z R n c z i u t e i , r- CCnLca-z. o, nrLri,me il f ?*2' 3 7 1 were not United States Gypsum Company documents. 2 Therefore, they were not produced absent other 3 verification . 4 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 5 Q. A n d t h a t ' s the c a s e e v e n t h o u g h -- l e t ' s 6 ta k e t h e m in order. E x h i b i t 2 was a copy of a 7 letter from Mr. B r own of J o h n s - M a n v i 1 1 e to Mr. 8 Offutt, a s s i s t a n t tc the p r e s i d e n t of U.S. Gypsum- 9 C o m p a n y ; th a t is, the l e t t e r i t self was not a l e t t e r 1 0 to or from any U.S. Gypsum a t t o r n e y ? ... 1 1 A . T h e r e is no U.S. G y p s u m at to r n e y on t h a t 1 2 letter, that's correct . 1 3 Q . And the c o p y of the f i r s t p r o g r e s s r e p o r t 1 4 of M a y 5, 1937 , E x h i b i t 3, w a s an at tachn.ent to t h a t 1 5 l e t t e r to Mr . Of f u t t of U .S . G y p s u m C o m p a n y ? 1 6 A . Y e s , a n d it b e a r s t h e f i l e n o t a t i o n o f ..t h e 1 7 Keek f irm . ' 1 8 Q. A h a n d w r i t t e n n o t e in t h e u p p e r right:hand 1 9 corner? 2 0 A. T h a t ' s c o r r e c t , and it cam e out of a file J. 2 1 that bore the same notation. 22 Q. A n d E x h i b i t 5, t h e J e r s e y C i e v stu y / 23 bears no m e n t i o n t h e r e o n of any U.S. G y p s u m a w y e r ? 2 4 A. T h a t 's m y r e c o l l e c t i o n . I w o u l d h .ve tp \WA < W / , e R o i-c .n ie .x c j a n d c e d f i i o c u i U i .,O n e . CFucaso, fj[Cine<t C (312; 7-22-SOS7 38 1 a g a i n , read it wor d for w o r d to v e r i f y it, but r 2 that's my recollection. 3 Q. And indeed, the other correspondence would 4 r e f l e c t t h a t the l a w f i r m g o t its c o p y of t h i s s t u d y 5 from U.S. Gypsum? 6 A. But I d i d n ' t have that c o r r e s p o n d e n c e at 7 the ti m e in the 1980 ti m e frame. 8 Q. I u n d e r s t a n d that. But we now know that 9 t h e c o p y of t h i s s t u d y g i v e n to ,the l a w f i r m c a m e _ 1 0 from U.S. Gypsum, correct? 1 1 A. That's what the correspondence would 1 2 a ppear to suggest. 1 3 Q. Ms. Torrey, was this Mr. Snell's d e c i s i o n 1 4 or your d e c i s i o n ? 1 5 A. Mr. Snell's decision, to the extern that, 1 6 a g ain, I h a v e c h a r a c t e r i s e d it as a j u d g m e n t and,.an 1 7 opinion. 1 8 Q. It was Mr. S n e l l ' s j u d g m e n t and o p i n i o n ? 1 9 A . Yes, sir. 2 0 Q . You would agree with me that these . 2 1 d o c u m e n t s re f l e e t on t h e i r f a c e t h a t s o m e b o d y in the 2 2 c o m p a n y h a d n o t i c e , s o m e b o d y in the oc r p o r a t e 23 s t r u c t u r e , h ad not ice of the t h ing s c o n t a i n e d i n _ t f e 2 4 documents? r Wi nui c z f^ c te .n c .'i a n d c d f i x o c i a t s - i .,O n .c . C hU r.so, G u i n e a e (3 '2 ) 72-E0S7 39 1 A. I would agree with that statement today. - A 2 I d o n ' t t h i n k I w o u l d have a g r e e d w i t h it in 1980. 3 Q. Y o u w o u l d a g r e e w i t h me t h a t if one of my 4 c l i e n t s had d o c u m e n t s in t h e i r files, t h e y c o u l d not 5 l eg itimately protect them from dis cov er y simply by 6 giving them to me as their a t t o r n e y ? 7 MR. CALE : I'm going to object to that ques t i o n 8 and instruct her not to answer. I think that - 9 c i e a r l v is c a l l i n g for he r j u d g m e n t as an a t t o r n e y 1 0 to e i t h e r a g r e e w i t h ycu or d i s a g r e e with you as an 1 1 a t t o r n e y as to w h a t you m i g h t or m i g h t not o p i n e to 1 2 a client. 1 3 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 4 Q. F r o m the t i m e y ou m e t w i t h Mr. S n e l l in 1 5 e a rly 1980 until the time you ceased w orking on 1 6 a s b e s t o s cases on A u g u s t 20, '84, to your k n o w l e d g e , 1 7 d i d 0 .S . G y p s u m C o m p a n y e v e r p r o d u c e any one of 1 8 t h e s e t h r e e d o c u m e n t s in any a s b e s t o s l a w s u i t , 1 9 e i t h e r p e r s o n a l inj u r y or p r o p e r t y d a m a g e ? 20 A. The re was a word m i s s i n g in your que s t io n . 2 1 I assume you mean produced to any plaintiff? -- 22 Q. Yes. 23 A . T h a t ' s cor r e c t . I ' m n o t a w a r e t h a t a n v erf 24 t h o s e t h ree d o c u m e n t s w e r e e v e r o r o c u c e o a u r i c ^ -y*~ ^ addoiznC 's.-uj a n d c d fi.iO c L a z , j j n c . C k ica-qo, Ji[inoii C (312) 7^62-508y 1 time f r a m e . 2 MR. CALE: Off the record. 3 (WHEREUFON, discussion was had 4 off the record. ) 5 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.) 6 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 7 Q. Ms. T o r r e y , I u n d e r s t a n d one of the 8 j u s t i f i c a t i o n s for not g i ving or p r o v i d i n g copies of 9 t h o s e d o c u m e n t s in d i s c o v e r y in ,1 9 8 0 w a s t h a t you, 1 0 t h a t is, the c o m p a n y w a n t e d to c o n d u c t in y o u r w o r d s 1 1 an e x t e n s i v e i n v e s t i g a t i o n to see w h a t if a n y 1 2 confirming documents might exist? 1 3 A. That's correct. 1 4 Q. Now, as I u n d e r s t a n d the p o s i t i o n of U - S . 1 5 G y p s u m C o m p a n y today, you b e l ieve that tne documents, 1 6 these later d o c u m e n t s I referred to, such as the 1 7 P a r r i s h letter and the let t e r to Mr. Ready, were 1 8 a c t u a l l y part or c o n t a i n e d in the b o x e s found by Ms. 1 9 W o o d r u f f in 1980, is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 2 0 A. You have been provided with some memoranda 2 1 that Donna Woodruff wrote me, the reason sole 22 i n f e r e n c e f rom w h i c h is t h a t t h e s e the three Keck 2 3 b o x e s were fo u n d by her in 1980. Does a n s w e 24 veer Question? WM <oR.o tc n J jz 'tq dnicaao, one C <zrJ-i.iOC.La.tzt f312'77-8Cc 4 1 1 Q. Yes. And, of c o u r s e , P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 2 7 -- e x c u s e me, P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 6, a l e t t e r to 3 Mr. Ready s u m m a r i z i n g the J e r s e y City report, and 4 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 7, t h e l e t t e r f r o m Mr. P a r r i s h 5 f o r w a r d i n g the R e a d y letter on the J e r s e y Cicy 6 r e p o r t to the Re c k firm were found in t h o s e b oxes, 7 lat e r found in t h o s e b o x e s ? 8 A. Yes, b ut I was not a w a r e of t h e m b e i n g in 9 those boxes until 1984. _ 1 0 Q. I u n d e r s t a n d tha t . My q u e s t i o n is, in 1 1 your e x t e n s i v e s e a r c h or i n v e s t i g a t i o n , did you ever 1 2 go t h r o u g h the b o x e s w h i c h Ms. W o o d r u f f fou n d in 1 3 1980 ? 1 4 A. No, because I don't know what boxes --at 1 5 that time, I did not know what boxes she had found 1 6 when we tried to go back through. I knew that she 1 7 had found one box, the s o - c a l l e d d e p a r t m e n t 198 1 8 silicosis box, which was t r a n s f e r r e d to the legal 1 9 d e p a r t m e n t at a b o u t the t i m e she d i s c o v e r e d it. 20 She d i s c o v e r e d th a t box at the same ti me 2 1 that I now know she disco ve red the other chree. 2 2 T h a t box has b e e n c o n t i n u o u s l y m a i n t a i n e d in tne 23 l e g a l d e p a r t m e n t s i n c e a p p r o x i m a t e l y J a m r* 1 9 8 Or 2 4 T h a o box b e a r s t h e n o t a t i o n b o x 1 of 2. 4 2 1 When we tried to go b ack and find box 2 of 2 2, w h i c h I a l w a y s a s s u m e d w a s t h e b o x o u t of w h i c h 3 t h e s e m a t e r i a l s h a d come., we c o u l d n ' t f i n d b o x 2 of 4 2 . 5 Q. W e l l , l e t ' s c l a r i f y th ;t b e c a u s e I d ~ n 't 6 want the record to be confused. 7 One box which Ms. W o c d r u f f found which was 8 not a law firm box was taken to the legal d epartment? 9 A . Co r rect . v. . 1 0 Q. And you don't know whether these three 1 1 docum e n t s we have been referring to were from that 1 2 box or the other thr e e b o x e s ? Y o u d o n ' t k n o w 1 3 w h e t h e r P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t s 5, 2 a n d 3 c a m e f r o m 1 4 t h a t box or some oth e r box or b o x e s ? 1 5 A. D u r i n g the p e r i o d s o m e t i m e in the su m m e r 1 6 of 19 8 0 , w h i c h was after D o n n a W o o d r u f f had left,us, 1 7 through the peried 1984, I had a recollection that 1 8 D o n n a had f o u n d two b o x e s , h ad one of t h e m in the 1 9 d e p a r t me n t . 2 0 It b o r e a l a b e l t h a t s a i d box 1 o f 2 f r.om 2 1 w h ic h I c o u l d infer t h e r e was a s e c o n d be x . W e * 2 2 could find t h at sec o nd box. It was no t unt i l 2 3 that I k n e w o f 4-Yia a x i s g c 6 of the o h r0 0 - J lied K e c k bo x e 3 . it w a s not: u n t i l r3 C 0 ^ j_ n -- \ W / / 7 a CW o t j c , <xnA c^rJ-iiO C La.tsi, /J n c . s m Ckicaao, itinoli e o ' . y 122 ~oe~ 4 3 1 when the three Woodruff m e m o r an d a were located that A 2 I know or became aware of the fact that tne three 3 b o xes found in 1984 were the same thr e e boxes 4 ; o p a r e n t l y -- were the same b o x e s that Donna had 5 found in 1980. 6 Q. I'm afraid we're getting ahead of 7 o u r s e l v e s . I'm g o i n g to a s k y o u a b o u t 1984 in 8 awhile. But I want to try to focus our attention.on 9 1960. 1 0 . In 1980, Ms. W o o d r u f f located among other 1 1 t h i n g s one box w h i c h was t r a n s f e r r e d to the legal 1 2 department? 1 3 A . That's correct. 1 4 Q. Oka y . A d d i t i o n a l l y , Ms. W o o d r u f f sent,.you 1 5 a m e m o r a n d u m in 1980 w h i c h r e f l e c t e d that she 1 6 located three boxes of documents, correct? __ 1 7 A. M a y I see w h i c h m e m o r a n d u m y o u ' r e . 1 8 referring to? This m e m o r a n d u m suggests she found 1 9 t h r e e b o r e s in 1980. 20 MR. S P E I G H T S : I am g o i n g to ask that be m a r k e d __ ^ ju 2 1 Z- S 0 2 2 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 2 3 p l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i c i c N o . 3-, 2 4 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of " -29-55.) cz/^oi.E.n&z.'uj a n d C7nizaqo, O ih n o L i # (2" 2 ,'72-5Q87 .J jn c . 4 4 1 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: A 2 Q. N o w my q u e s t i o n is, f i rst, in your 3 extensive search to see whether there were 4 confirming documents, for whatever reason, you did 5 not nor do you k n o w of a n y o n e who w e n t t h r o u g h the 6 t h r e e b o x e s r e f e r r e d to in P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 8 7 until 1984? 8 A. That's correct. - 9 Q. In a d d i t i o n , in yo u r e x t e n s i v e s e a r c h for 1 0 several years, no one t h o r o u g h l y went through the 1 1 box which Ms. Woodruff brought t 0 the legal 1 2 department 7 1 3 A . Yes. 1 4 Q. Yes, t h a t 's correct? 1 5 A. Yes, that's c o r r e c t . 1 6 Q. N o w , we are s t i l l in 1 9 8 0 . I t h i n k we 1 7 h a v e gone th rough M s . W o o d r u f f 1s d i s c o v e r y . I 1 8 b e l i e v e in 1980 also th a t the f i r s t l a w s u i t was 1 9 f i l e d a g a i n s t 13.S. G y p s u m b y b u i l d i n g o w n e r s 2 0 r e g a r d i n g a s b e s t o s - c o n t a i n i n g m a t e r i a l s in its . 2 1 b u i l d i n g , is t h a t y o u r r e c o l l e c t i o n ? 2 2 A. The Ci nn ami ns on School District case was -- Q f i l e d in 1980. ,, 2 4 Q. Thao was a New Jersey school district? ,, \WA7a QVoOfe., d d o ezn D z'U ] a n d c d f e t o c u x U i ,O n e .. dh.Lca.QO, U Liinois. (312) 72-c 45 1 A.Correct. 2 Q. W h a t was th e p r o d u c t at i s s u e in t h e N e w 3 Jersey case? 4 A. I h a v e not read t h a t c o m p l a i n t in m a n y 5 years, but I seem to recall that the c omplaint 6 itself referenced Audicote. 7 Q. That was an acoustical plaster made by 8 U n i t e d S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y in p r e v i o u s y e a r s ? - 9 A . Co rrect . . 1 0 Q. W a s A u d i c o t e the m o s t n a m e d p r o d u c t in the 1 1 lawsuits against USG, the property damage lawsuits 1 2 against USG during the period you were involved? 1 3 A. Oh, I can't state that because I never did 1 4 a c o u n t of the c o m p l a i n t s of h o w m a n y had the word 1 5 A u d i c o t e in them. 1 6 Q. A u d i c o t e was an a c o u s t i c a l p l a s t e r sold, by 1 7 U.S. G y p s u m sold f r o m s o m e t i m e in the '50s into - 1 8 early 1970s? 1 9 A . Correct. 2 0 Q . A n d it was th e s u b j e c t o f o t h e r l a w s u i t s 2 1 besides the New Jersey lawsuit? 2 2 A . At some p o i n t in tim e , ye s . 2 3 Q. Now, my u n d e r s t a n d i n g i s that in 2 4 c o n n e c t i o n w i t h that l a w s u i t in 1980, you wen t tc. n w / I( <z/^oiLn(jz'ia <xnJ. c^jiLocuits.i yfjnc. C.r.i.o.Qo, iJCimcii (312} 2-1?j7 4 6 1 the research d e p a r t m e n t and met with at least two - A 2 g e n t l e m e n c o n c e r n i n g the p r o d u c t Audicote, is that 3 cor rect? 4 A. That's correct. 5 Q. And on that occasion, did you check out e the o r i g i n a l l a b o r a t o r y f i les m a i n t a i n e d at the 7 research d e p a r t m e n t on A u d i c o t e ? 8 A. At my request, I was given what I - 9 u n d e r s t o o d to be t h e w o r k i n g fi l^e s m a i n t a i n e d b y t h e 1 0 plasters l a b o r a t o r y relating to Audicote. . 1 1 y. How many files were there; what size was 1 2 t h e -- w h a t q u a n t i t y w e r e g i v e n to y o u ? 1 3 A. I recall that the paper was organized into 1 4 files for a size paper e i g h t - a n d - a - h a l f by eleven 1 5 and th a t the t o t a l v o l u m e of file f o l d e r s w o u l d be 1 6 a b o u t t h r e e q u a r t e r s of a file d r a w e r . 1 7 Q . W o u l d y o u a g r e e w i t h me t h a t if y o u 1 8 s t a c k e d t h e m cn top of e a c h o t h e r , t h e y w o u l d be 1 9 a b o u t t h r e e feet in h e i g h t ? 2 0 A. That's correct. . 2 1 Q. N o w , t h e s e w e r e h a r d c o p i e s , w e r e n 't t h e y ? 2 2 A. T h a t ' s c o r r e c t . 23 Q. And m any of t hem were r e s e a r c h reports_ ' 2 4 w h i c h were also on m i c r o f i l m ? T WM W/a, c ^ o i . z n i j s . 'Uj a n J . c r f - i- iiO c L a ic i., J n c .. C f u CQ-QO, UHUr.oii e (312) 7S2-8C37 4 7 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. But the hard copies alto included 3 m e m o r a n d a and h a n d w r i t t e n notes which would not he 4 on m i c r o f i l m , is that c o r r e c t ? 5 A. It is c o r r e c t that I reca l l that t h e r e 6 would be m e m o r a n d a and h a n d w r i t t e n notes on those 7 files, and it is c o r r e c t tha t t h o s e m a t e r i a l s w o u l d 8 not be on microfilm. 9 Q. What did you do with the hard copies of 1 0 these files? 1 1 A . I brought them back to my off ice 1 2 Q . And that still was 10 1 South W a c 1 3 A . T h a t 's correc t . 1 4 Q And for some period o f time, you 1 5 m a i n t a i n e d t h e m in y o u r i n d i v i d u a l o f f i c e ? 1 6 A . That'1s c o r r e c t . 1 7 Q Now , let me mo v e to 1981. I believe 1 8 that's when you told me that your prircipal joe 1 9 beginning in 1981 was c o o r d i n a t i n g U.S. G y p s u m ' s 20 d e f e n s e to a s b e s t o s p r o p e r t y da m a g e cases? 2 1 A. Y e s , b e g i n n i n g ir. t h e f all of 1981 after- 2 2 my return from maternity leave. 2 3 0. And in than c a p a c i t y , you c o n t i n u e d to ' 2 4 r e oo r t no Mr. S n e l l ? wwa n i c!jS , <Z-^OL.n and C-ki-aQO, dLimai. # c O i i o c i a t z * ,O n e . 2 '7 2 - S C S ? 48 1 A. That's correct, except for there was a 2 p e r i o d of t i m e in 1984 w h e n Mr. L e i s t e n was 3 a s s o c i a t e g e n e r a l c o u n s e l and at that time I 4 formally repotted to him. 5 Q. T h e f o l l o w i n g y e a r in 1982, my 6 understanding was you located some internal 7 o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n s , is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 8 A . Ye s . 9 Q. Can you tell us wh a t an i n t e r n a l o p e r a t i n g 1 0 bulletin is? 1 1 A. Well, let's back up. I knew about 1 2 o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n s p r o b a b l y in 1977 or 1978. I did 1 3 not l e a r n of o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n s in 1982. 1 4 Q. W h a t are o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n s ? 1 5 A. O p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n s are of n u m e r o u s t y p e s . 1 6 It's a generic term relating to bulletins which are 1 7 h i s t o r i c a l l y m a i n t a i n e d by the com p a n y relating to 1 8 such thi n g s as p r o d u c t i o n m e t h o d s , plant safety, 1 9 plant operations, product formulations, marketing 20 information. I'm forgetting a category. . 2 1 Q. In any e v e n t , t h e y are i n t e r n a l document's 22 within U.S. Gypsum Company? 2 3 A. T h a t ' s c o r r e c t . _ ' 2 4 Q . And I show yon a copy of a m e m o r a n d u m f t o m WiltfA nvofc, <z/^oi.c.n'rz'uj and (zdfzzociatzz,jjnc. Cf-.i CQ.QO, D i h r . o i i C (3 12' 7S2-S0S7 4 9 1 S.K. T o r r e y to T.S. Sne l l d a t e d M a r c h 24, '82 and 2 ask if you r e c o g n i z e th a t d o c u m e n t ? 3 A. I have seen this document recently. 4 MR. S P E I G H T S : I wou l d ask that be m a r k e d as 5 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 9. 6 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 7 P la i n t i f f ' s D e p osition Exhibit No. 9 8 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 9 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 0 Q. The d o c u m e n t c o n s i s t s of t h r e e pages. 1 1 Would you agree with me that that document reflects 1 2 t h a t in 1982, you r e v i e w e d , a m o n g ot h e r s , o p e r a t i n g 1 3 bulletins dated 1943, 1948 and 1954? 1 4 MR. CALE: Can we take a minute? 1 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: Sure. ' 1 6 (WHEREUPON, discu ss ion was had 1 7 off the record between the witness 1 8 and Mr. C a l e , out of the 1 9 h e a r i n g of o t h e r c o u n s e l and the 20 court reporter.) 2 1 MR. CALE: Okay. 2 2 3Y THE WITNESS: 23 A. Can you read the question back, please? 2 4 (WHEREUPON record w r e aa 5 0 1 by the reporter as requested.) 2 BY THE WITNESS: 3 A. Yes. 4 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 5 2 ^ s h o w y o u a t w o - p a g e o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n 6 d a t e d A u g u s t 24, 1943, No. 2-5 and a s k you if t h a t 7 is the '43 b u l l e t i n r e f e r r e d to in tha t m e m o r a n d u m ? 8 A . Yes . 9 MR. S P E I G H T S : I w o u l d a s k v t h a t be m a r k e d as 1 0 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 10, c o n s i s t i n g of two pa g e s , 1 1 operating bulletin. 1 2 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 3 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No. 10, 1 4 f o r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7-- 29 -- 86 . ) 1 5 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 6 Q. In your m e m o r a n d u m to Mr. Snell I b e l i e v e 1 7 y o u q u o t e d f r o m t h e 1943 b u l l e t i n , is t h a n c o r r e c t ? 1 8 A . Yes. 1 9 Q. Would you read that quote, please? 20 A. As r e v e a l e d in th e m e m o r a n d u m , it state.s, 2 1 "It is r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t b e f o r e any a p p l i c a n t for * 22 e m p l o y m e n t is h i r e d , the h i s t o r y of his p r e v i o u s 2 3 e m p l o y m e n t be f u l l y d e v e l o p e d . If t h e r e is a ~ 24 q u e s t i o n a b l e h i s t o r y of e x p o s u r e to a s b e s t o s or ,, WM < z/X>oicn.{? .~ uj a n d ctTyiioctafai j j r z c . (C n ic a q o , U ffi n o L i C (2*2 7S2-8027 5 1 1 s i l i c a dust or an i n d i c a t e d p a r t i a l lung disability. A 2 su c h as t u b e r c u l o s i s , the a p p l i c a n t s h o u l d not be 3 employed until satisfactorily passing a medical 4 examination. Such a medical examination shall 5 i n c l u d e the t a k i n g of c h e s t x - r a y s and the i r 6 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n by Saranac L a b o r a t o r i e s as set forth 7 in b u l l e t i n 4-5." 8 That concludes the quote from the bulletin. 9 Q. A n d t h e n I b e l i e v e -- .1 w o u l d r e q u e s t t h a t 1 O y o u r e a d t h e l a s t p a r a g r a p h on p a g e 2. 1 1 A. The last p a r a g r a p h on page 2 states, 1 2 "I b e l i e v e t h e s e d o c u m e n t s are s u f f i c i e n t to i m p u t e 1 3 to the c o r p o r a t i o n some k n o w l e d g e of the 1 4 r e l a t i o n s h i p between exposure to asbestos and 1 5 d e v e l o p m e n t of some d i s e a s e . A c c o r d i n g l y . I nelieve 1 6 we are g o i n g to h a v e to d i s c l o s e t h i s in f u t u r e 1 7 answers to i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s d ep e n d i n g o b v i o u s l y on 1 8 the p r e c i s e w o r d i n g of the i n t e r r o g a t o r y . " 1 9 Q. I'm now going to show you a document also 2 O e n t i t l e d , " E l i m i n a t i o n of D u s t y C o n d i t i o n s " dated. 2 1 O c t o b e r 4 , 19 37 and a s k y o u if y o u r e c o g n i z e t h a t "" 22 C 0cument? 2 3 A . Do I race gnize it? - 2 4 Q . Yes . r.a v a v c u s a a n it b e f o r e ? csO o i.tljC'L^ CLTul aJ-i.OCUltci. ,O n e . Cnicavo, LnoU (312) 72-B0S^ 5 1 A. I have no idea . . f 2 Q. You are familiar with operating bulletins 3 t h a t d o e s r e f l e c t t h a t it is an o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n 4 of U.S. G y p s u m Company, d o e sn't it? 5 A. Yes, it is. 6 Q. Is t h a t a p r e d e c e s s o r b u l l e t i n to 7 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 10 w h i c h y o u j u s t rea d f r o m ? 8 A. No, at least not bas e d on the b u l l e t i n 9 numbe r . . 1 0 Q. I believe that -- 1 1 A. And you said a predecessor? What's the 1 2 date on that one? 1 3 Q. 1937. 1 4 A. Well, the two bulletins have the same 1 5 t i t l e . My r e a s o n for s a y i n g th a t one is not a 1 6 p r e d e c e s s o r of t h e o t h e r is b a s e d s o l e l y on the 1 7 bulletin number. 1 8 Q. W e l l , I b e l i e v e y o u a l s o n o t e in y o u r 1 9 memorandum that the previous operating bulletin, 2 0 that is, the i m m e d i a t e l y p r e v i o u s one, had not been 2 1 located. 2 2 A. No. No. We have not located 4-5. I 2 3 d o n ' t k n o w t h a t 4-5 is t h e p r e d e c e s s o r to t h i s o n e r 2 4 4-5 is r e f e r e n c e d in the q u o t e d p a r a g r a p - . r Q V o C fz, <ad^oi.s.n!j.xc a n d c T f a o c L a tz i, dJfzc. Cfuzaao, dJCUnott t (312) T2`BGS? 53 1 Q . Is that 4-5? 2 A. No, t h a t ' s 4-5-i. 3 Q. So t h a t ' s not the same as the 4-5 r e f e r r e d 4 to in this? 5 A. I w o u l d h ave to go b a c k t h r o u g h all of 6 t h e m , but I am a s s u m i n g t h a t t h e r e is a 4-5 s e p a r a t e 7 from 4-5-1. 8 Q. Now, I also believe -- we are up to 1982, 9 Ms. T o rrey. I also b e l i e v e in 1982 that other 1 0 l a w s u i t s were filed a g a i n s t U.S. G y p s u m C o m p a n y on 1 1 b e h a l f of b u i l d i n g o wners. 1 2 A. I r e c a l l one, p o s s i b l y t w o in 1982. 1 3 Q. A n d t h e n in 1 9 8 3 , s o m e o t h e r l a w s u i t s w e r e 1 4 filed on beha l f of b u i l d i n g own e r s ? .. 1 5 A. Since -- continuously since 1982, there 1 6 have been suits filed. __ 1 7 Q. And a m o n g t h o s e c a s e s f i l e d in 1982 and 1 8 the first half of 1983 w o u l d ha v e b e e n L e x i n g t o n , 1 9 South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina, 2 0 Huntsville, Alabama and Spartanburg, South Carolina? 2 1 A . I r e c a l l s p e c i f i c a l l y t h a t L e x i n g t o n w as- 22 s e r v e d cn U n i t e d S t a t e s G 'p s u m C o m p a n y the day aft e r 23 M a n v f i l e filed b a n k r u p t c y w h ich w o u l d put it, I 1 - 2 4 b e l i e v e , at A u g u s t 26, '82. y VoC^t, Chicago, u ru i c^ -f-tiocu xtsii, j j n c . jJitinoii (312)762-8087 54 1 The other cases you mentioned were filed r- 2 s o m e t i m e t h e r e a f t e r . W h e t h e r it was lat e '82 or 3 e a r l y '83, I would have to c h e c k the records. 4 Q. In any event, as a result of these cases, 5 U.S. G y p s u m had to respond to various d i s c o v e r y 6 requests? 7 A . Yes. 8 Q. And those discovery requests included both 9 requests for U.S. Gypsum documents and written 1 0 i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s or q u e s t i o n s to U.S. G y p s u m C o m o a n y 11 by the school districts? 1 2 A . Yes. 1 3 Q. You c o o r d i n a t e d the responses to tnis 1 4 discovery? - 1 5 A. That's correct. ' 1 6 Q. In r e s p o n s e to this d i s c o v e r y , did you,, 1 7 r e v e a l or p r o d u c e a n y of the t h r e e e x h i b i t s w h i c n 1 8 you r e v i e w e d in 1980 th a t Ms. W o o d r u f f p r e s e n t e d to 1 9 you, that is, eit h e r the l e t t e r from Mr. Brown to 2 0 Mr. O f f u t t cr the first p r o g r e s s report or Dr. , 2 1 G a r d n e r ' s st uc y of the J e r s e y C ity p lan t ? 2 2 A. I 'm h a v i n g t r o u e l i n g W i t h y o u r que s a ion 2 3 only because I believe you ask ed g id I ever c a use a o 2 4 be p r o d u c e d a n y of the se t h r e m h e a n s w e r - ^ t h a n czf^oicnDz.'Uj and Cinicaa c , O t i l r i o i i # (312) 7>S2-0B7 ,O n : . 5 5 1 is no, I did not c a u s e any of t h e s e t h r e e to be 2 produced. 3 If the q u e s t i o n is h a v e any of t h e s e t h r e e 4 ever been produced, I don't know the circumstances 5 of t h e i r being p r o d u c e d to you in S p a r t a n b u r g 6 b e c a u s e I b e l i e v e t h e y w e r e p r o d u c e d in r e s p o n s e to 7 d i s c o v e r y . And S p a r t a n b u r g would have been filed at 8 about the same time as your other cases. - 9 Q. Let me rephrase the question. _ 1 0 In r e s p o n s e s to d i s c o v e r y in 1983 in any 1 1 of the s e four cases, L e x i n g t o n , G r e e n v i l l e , 1 2 H u n t s v i l l e or S p a r t a n b u r g , did you eith e r p r o d u c e or 1 3 refer to the three d o c u m e n t s which Ms. W o o d r u f f 1 4 p r e s e n t e d to you in 1980, t h a t is, the 3 r o w n to - 1 5 O f f u t t l e t t e r , t h e f i r s t p r o g r e s s r e p o r t or the N e w 1 6 Jersey study p e r f o r m e d by Dr. Gardner? - 1 7 A. If we refer s p e c i f i c a c i y to any of t h e s e 1 8 t h r e e d o c u m e n t s in any d i s c o v e r y fil e d in t h o s e 1 9 c a s e s in 1983, the a n s w e r is no. 2 0 Q. Now, I g o not want to review the entire. .1 2 1 d i s c o v e r y of t h o s e t h r e e c a s e s . 2 2 A . Thank you. 2 3 Q. But I would ask you to read 24 i n t e r r o g a t o r y 77 and the a n s w e r in tn e er WM a n d zrJ-itocLaUi.,{3 n c . Ck inaac, UCCir.oU * (312) 702-8051 56 1 c a s e and r e q u e s t No. 10 and t h e r e s p o n s e in t h e 2 Greenville case. 3 A. W e l l , y ou are s h o w i n g me s o m e t h i n g t h a t is 4 not -- 5 Q. I ca n s h o w you the a c t u a l d i s c o v e r y if y o u 6 would like. 7 A. I'll read w h a t ' s h e r e and you h a v e t: 8 r e p r e s e n t that t h a t ' s what it is. I don't k n o w w h a t 9 it is, but I'll read it. . 1 0 Q. No, I'll just get it out then. Ms. Torr e y , 1 1 I s h o w you the G.S. G y p s u m C o m p a n y ' s r e s p o n s e s to 1 2 p l a i n t i f f ' s f i r s t set of i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s in the 1 3 G r e e n v i l l e case, d a t e d or v e r i f i e d on June 28, 1983. 1 4 I a s k you to read i n t e r r o g a t o r y 77 -- it's not 1 5 n e c e s s a r y to read the subparts -- and U.S. Gypsum 1 6 C o m p a n y ' 1s r e s p o n s e to t h a t i n t e r r o g a t o r y . , 1 7 A . Q u e s t i o n 77 w i t h o u t the s u b p a r t - 1 8 s t a t e s , "Did you d i rec t to be p e r f o r m e d , s p o n s o r , 1 9 f i n a n c e or r e c e i v e the r e s u l t s of any s t u d i e s or 20 tests p e f o r m e d by the S a r a n a c Lake L a b o r a t o r y or the 2 1 Trudeau F o undation relating to asbestos exposure anc 22 its e f f e c t on h u m a n 1 i fe . If so, i d e n t i f y . " 2 3 The r e s p o n s e i , "None of w h i c h t h i c - 2 4 d e f e n d a n t is c u r r e n t l y a w a re ." y addoi-znC 'c ta a n d c d 'f ito c ia tL i., dJnC) C k i z a a o , i t l n o i i . (3 T2: 762-80S7 57 1 Q. In addition to that, I b elieve that 2 Greenville served requests to produce on U.S. Gypsum. 3 Do you recall that? 4 A. I don't s p e c i f i c a l l y recall it. I'm sure 5 you did. 6 Q. Do you recognize this order of judge 7 Wilkins? 8 A . Yes . 9 Q. And I b e l i e v e J u d g e W e l k i n s on page 3 _ 1 0 q u o t e s r e q u e s t No. 10 and t h e r e s p o n s e , a g r e e d ? 1 1 A. That's what it appears to be, yes. 1 2 Q. W o u l d y o u r e a d th e r e q u e s t to p r o d u c e 10 1 3 and U.S. Gypsum Company's response? 1 4 A. It states, "Any and all other records,, 1 5 c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , m i n u t e s or other d o c u m e n t s of -his 16 defendant including all subsidiaries, divisions and 17 predecessor entities wherein the potential health 1 8 effects cf a s b e s t o s have been d i s c u s s e d . " 1 9 Response, "Documents responsive to this 20 request have recently been found and will be . 2 1 forwarded to plain t i f f ' s attorney." 22 Q. Now, in response, my u n d e r s t a n d i n g is, 23 again, you did not produce the documents located ^ b y 2 4 Ms. W o o d r u f f in 1 9 8 0 beca u s e or one judgment: Mr. _ W iftfA W oLft, and cOfi-LOcixits.a, One.. C k u a Q o . fJC Lr.cu e (3i2,W2-ecs-' 1 8 "i 1 Snell made at that time? 2 A . Yes. 3 Q . Ad ditionally, you did not procure the 1943 4 o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n t h a t we ha v e now m a r k e c as 5 P l a i n t i f f 's E x h i b i t 10, is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 6 A. I don't know. 7 Q. Y o u do n o t k n o w w h e t h e r y o u p r o d u c e d t h e '4 BI 8 b u l l e t i n or not? ' 9 A. In any d i s c o v e r y ? 1 0 Q. No, in r e s p o n s e to t h a t r e q u e s t to p r o d u c e 1 1 in 1983. 1 2 A. Oh, in '83. I d o n ' t b e l i e v e so. 1 3 Q. A d d i t i o n a l l y , Ms. T o r r e v , in 1S83, 1 4 s o m e t i m e d u r i n g the m i d d l e of that year, t h e s e t a ree 1 5 d o c u m e n t s , E x h i b i t s 2, 3 a n d 5, f o u n d b y Ms. 1 6 W o o d r u f f in 1 5 8 9 , w e r e t r a n s f e r r e d f r o m U.S. G y p s . u m 's 1 7 h e a d q u a r t e r s , is t h a t c o r r e c t ? ' 1 8 A . Yes. 1 9 Q. My u n d e r s t a n d i n g is f r o m 1980 w n e n t h e y 20 were d i s c o v e r e d until so m e t i m e around June or J u l y , 2 1 1983, t h e y w e r e l o c a t e d or m a i n t a i n e d m the lega_ 22 d e p a r t m e n t at U.S. G y p s u m ' s h e a d q u a r t e r s an 101 2 3 South Wacter, Chicago? . " 2 4 A . Th; c o y r a r* O.icffz, ' Chicaao, and c ^ t t o c ia U t , One.. U C L r . o U (3 ` 7 B 2 - S C B 7 5 9 1 w h i c h they were given to me. 2 Q. Sometime during that period, you directed 3 a n o t h e r a t t o r n e y in the U.S. G y p s u m C o m p a n y 1leg a l 4 d e p a r t m e n t to carry them to the Keck firm which had 5 represented you over the years -- represented U.S. 6 Gypsum over the years? 7 A . Yes. 8 Q. Was any i n v e n t o r y m a d e of wh a t was - 9 actually carried over there? . 1 0 A . Wo. 1 1 Q. Was any cover letter prepared which 1 2 a c c o m p a n i e d the d o c u m e n t s or w h i c h f o l l o w e d up on 1 3 the transfer? 1 4 A . No . ' 1 5 Q. Was t h e r e any c h a i n of c u s t o d y d o c u m e n t 1 6 e x e c u t e d w h e n y o u t r a n s f e r r e d t h e s e to t h e K e c k f,i rm . 1 7 A. None of w h i c h I am aware. 1 8 Q. War there any receipt slip executed over 1 9 at the Keck firm signing for the doc u m e n t s ? 20 A. I d o n ' t k n o w w h e t h e r one was or not. 2 1 h a v e not s e e n one. I d o n ' t k n o w if t h e y n a v e soraf 22 internal system that they may have maintained. 2 3 Q. It's also my understandin ose 24 60 1 t h r o u g h o u t the b a l a n c e of your t i m e as the - A 2 c o o r d i n a t o r of the p r o p e r t y d a m a g e l i t i g a t i o n , that 3 is, u n t i l A u g u s t of 1984, is t h a t c o r r e c t ? 4 A. I don't personally knew what the Keck firm 5 did wi t h the d o c u m e n t s . I r e q u e s t e d that t h e y be 6 m a i n t a i n e d as they wou l d any of t h eir other 7 h i s t o r i c a l client files. I had no reason to ask for 8 the d o c u m e n t s or to r e q u e s t to see the d o c u m e n t s or 9 have to have anything to do withr the documents 1 0 during the remaining time I was involved the 1 1 asbestos litigation. 1 2 Q . You do recognize now, however, that the 1 3 a c t u a l c o p y of E x h i b i c 2, t h e l e t t e r f r o m V a n d i v e r 1 4 B r o w n to J . S . O f f u t t , and t h e l e t t e r f r o m -- a n d th 1 5 first pro g r e s s report a t t a c h e d tc that letter have 1 6 not been located? . 1 7 A. I have been told that the tissue copy I 1 8 r e c a l l s e n d i n g -- t h a t I r e c a l l I had w h i c h is the 1 9 one I sent back has not been located. 20 Q. A d d i t i o n a l l y in 19 8 3 , y o u d i s c o v e r e d th.at -- 2 1 or b e g i n n i n g in 1983, y ou no l o n g e r c o u l d l o c a t e the 22 r e s e a r c h d o c u m e n t s or. A u d i c o t e t h a t we d i s c u s s e d 2 3 05.r3.i0r? 2 4 A . T h a t ' s c o r r e c t . T h a t h a p p e n e d in M a r c h , o f W 'B IB k Ui/} c, c:^oi.n[?E.zj and zdfiiocLaa, dJnc. CL C CLO O f CJitinoLi (312) 7S2-BC37 6 1 1 1983. t- 2 Q. And as of thi s dat e in 1986, t h o s e f o l d e r s 3 approximately three feet high have not been located 4 to your knowledge? 5 A. In the last year, year and a qu a r t e r , I 6 have been shown a number of f o l d e r s for my o p i n i o n 7 as to w h e t h e r any of t h e s e in f a c t w e r e any of the 8 documents that I had relating to the co-called - 9 A u d i c o t e w o r k i n g fil e s in 19 80 . 1 0 One file c o n f o r m s to my r e c o l l e c t i o n of 1 1 what those files looked like, but I cannot 1 2 p o s i t i v e l y c o n f i r m that any of t h e s e w h i c h I have 1 3 been shown in fact were those that I had. 1 4 Q. When were you shown this one that conforms? 1 5 A. I r e c a l l b e i n g s h o w n it two w e e k s ago w h e n 1 6 it c o n f o r m e d to my r e c o l l e c t i o n . I may have b e e n 1 7 s h o w n tha t same one e a r l i e r in t h i s same t ime p e r i o d J 1 8 I just d e s c r i b e d . But as of a b o u t two w e e k s ago, it | 1 9 l o o k e d to me w h e n I s a w it t h a t it c o n f o r m e d to my 20 recollection. . 2 1 Q . W h o s h o w e d it to you 2 2 A . My former secret ary. 2 3 Q. W a s it one fi l e fo l d 2 4 A . Correct . WM Q V offz, e z f ^ c i.z n (js .,u j a n d (dfiLcajQo, jJC tinoii G (2*?.} 782-508? ,O n e . 6 2 1 Q. Did she indicate that it w a s pulled f r o m a A 2 group? 3 A. I'm not sure. It was in the legal 4 d e p a r t m e n t . It was on the sixth floor. 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: Mr. Cale, I paused hopi n g that 6 you would v o l u n t e e r to go get that file or whatever 7 files I have been seeking since 1983. I don't want 8 to have to return and repeat this process. Is that 9 available? _ 1 0 MR. CALE: It isa v a i l a b l e . Infact, it is in 1 1 -he document production system of the company, i.e., 1 2 those documents that are regularly made available. 1 3 Why don't we -- I'm ]ust trying to think for a 14 minute. 1 5 Let's take a break and let me confer with 1 6 counsel and see where we go on that one. 1 7 (WHEREUPON,d i s c u s s i o n was had . 1 8 off the record.) 1 9 MR. SPEIGHTS: Let's go back on the record. 2 0 BY M R . S P E I G H T S : 2 1 Q Ms. T o r r e y , d u r i n g the b r e a k , c o u n s e l h a-s 2 : P r OV id e d me one file f o l d e r , les s than an inch thick, 2 3 _n a a igrit a r e e n colo r m a r k e d A u c i c o t e . * '> A ~bis che file folder vo u were rererring <TV o i j z , cd^ oicn z-icj a n d ir.to, i i i n o l t . O zdfiL O cL atzi, jn c . {312) 782-503 7 63 1 o t h a t c o n f o r m s at l e a s t in p a r t to w h a t y o u r e c a l l 2 s being the way the research documents were set up? 3 A . Yes. 4 Q. Y o u d o n ' t k n o w w h e t h e r t h i s is one of i_he 5 ;hree-foot stack or not? 6 A. I c a n ' t c o n f i r m it p o s i t i v e l y . 7 Q. And your r e c o l l e c t i o n , I b e l i e v e , is t h a t e ;he file f o l d e r s t h a t you got in 1980 from the - 9 r e s e a r c h d e p a r t m e n t w e r e b l u e inv,color? _ 1 0 A . T h a t 's co r rect . 1 1 Q. And you don't know to this day anything 1 2 a b o u t e i t h e r the b a l a n c e of the t h r e e - f o o t s t a c k or 1 3 the t h r e e - f o o t s t a c k i t s e l f , if t h i s is not one of 1 4 the stack? " 1 5 A . That's correct. ' 1 6 MR. C A L E : O b v i o u s l y , s u b j e c t tc all the thijics i 1 7 t h a t she has t e s t i f i e d tc on t h i s s u b j e c t in her - 1 8 p r i o r d e p o s i t i o n in this case. 1 9 MR. SPEIGHTS: I'm gcing to ask that coun s e l 20 p r o v i d e me a c o p y of e v e r y t h i n g in t h i s file f o l d e r 2 1 he c o p y of t he f il e f o l d e r i t s e l f . 2 2 MR. C A L S : It V*i 11 be d e n e 2 3 MR. SPEIGH rp C . If possible , I would like t c _ 2 4 one thing done tod ay to g iv e me s o m e t h i n g tc , QVofj-c. anA c^rfiiociaizi, fjnc. CZuomo, DiLnoit O (2'21 ^E2-8CS7 6 t 1 read on the airplane. 2 MR. CALE: We'll try. 3 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 4 q _ Ms. T o r r e y , I think we have talked up to 5 now the period 1979 up t h r o u g h 1983. I want to talk 6 to you a few m i n u t e s about 1984. 7 Y o u are a w a r e t h a t J u d g e W i l k i n s in the 8 Greenville case conducted a hearing on the 5 d e f e n d a n t ' s r e s p o n s e s to d i s c o v e r y from J a n u a r y 9, r - 1 0 1 9 84 ? 1 1 A . Yes. 1 2 q . i believe your local counsel provided you 1 3 a c o p y of the ru l i n g m a d e by J u d g e W i l k i n s at that 1 4 hearing? - 1 5 A. I was provided a portion of the transcript 1 6 which contained that rule, yes. __ 1 7 q. i show y o u thi s d o c u m e n t and a s k you if it 1 8 is a p o r t i o n of a t r a n s c r i p t y o u w e r e p r o v i d e d ? 1 9 A. It a p p e a r s to be. 20 Q. I n s o f a r as as J u d g e W i l k i n s ' s ruling ^ 2 1 a D o l i e s to n o t i c e d o c u m e n t s , I w o u l d a s k y o u to r e*aa 2 2 that ruling which I have I believe bracketed for you 23 A. The p o r t i o n you have b r a c k e t e d re ^ -- 2 4 v!Vr3- , 11V1ini--i -IL nav considered things, WM Ql'oCfe., dx'oiznijz'U] and cdj-iiociatzi, dJnc. C ^uaoo, fJttinoii * (312}7e2-SCS7 65 1 p l a c e all the p a r t i e s on n o t i c e t h a t t h i s o r d e r is 2 being issued with the court's full understanding and 3 intent to apply rule 37(B)(2)(C) to any offending 4 p a r t y of t h i s o r d e r w h i c h w i l l i n c l u d e the court, 5 e n t e r i n g a d e f a u l t j u d g m e n t or d i s m i s s i n g the a c t i o n 6 against the offending party. 7 There must be a time w h ere these m a t t e r s 8 are laid to rest and you get on to new b u s i n e s s and 9 the b u s i n e s s of r e s o l v i n g this c o n t r o v e r s y . . 1 O All t h e d e f e n d a n t s s h a l l a n s w e r w i t h i n . ..30 1 1 d a y s . I m i g h t add the c o u r t is g o i n g to r e v i e w the 1 2 responding answers with its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of good 1 3 faith, reasonable effort to comply and will not deal 1 4 nor allow j u s t i f i c a t i o n to be based on s e m a n t i c s . 1 5 All defendants shall answer this ' 1 6 i n t e r r o g a t o r y t h a t t h e c o u r t p r o p o u n d s w n _ c h is .. 1 7 p e r h a p s a c o m b i n a t i o n of n u m b e r s tr.at h a v e a l r e a a v 1 8 been p r o p o u n d e d . The date that the c o m p a n y cr its 1 9 o f f i c e r s or its a g e n t s or its e m p l o y e e s to the b e s t 20 of t h a t c o m p a n y ' s a n i l i t y m u s t s t a t e the date t h a t 2 1 t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s r e c e i v e d i n f o r ~ a t i o n w r i t t e n or 22 oral, first bec a m e aware of, firs" became sasp.v..Ou. 2 3 or the r ^ .u a s b e s t o s iTiay be 2 4 and ail s i m i l a r i n f r m a t e on s - r*a. :hat .-- r- s 3^ Ql'offz, ezRoi.ni'i} and , One r - aac o::^ou (312-'2SCS7 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 This includes information acquired nd i v i d u a l l y by the company, its o f f i c e r s , agents, n.ployees and information that was generally known n the i n d u s t r y . It also i n c l u d e s any facts, any lata, any reports, any opinions which tend to upport the b e l i e f t h a t a s b e s t o s is a h a r m f u l product to health." MR. SPE I G H T S : I'm going to ask that be m a r k e d P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 11. ^ . (WHEREUPON, said document was marked P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No. 11 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) BY MR. SPEIGHTS: Q. Now, in r e s p o n s e to t h a t c o u r t ord e r , did vou coordinate the U.S. Gypsum Company response? A . Y e s , I c o o r d i n a t e d it -- Q. Did y ou and, I t h i n k , M r . S m i t h in f a c t p r e p a r e the fi r s t d r a f t of it? A . Yes. Q. Did you consult with Mr . Snell c o n c e r n i n g the response? A . Yes, brief ly . Q. I sho w you t h i s doc um e nt and ask you if - hat is the r e s p o n s e w h i c n U .S . G y p s u m C o m p a n y filed, WM < W /, and cOJ-ttociaUt, One. (J.nicG.Qc, it m o L (312) /t2`8w37 6 7 1 again in response to Judge Wilkins's ruling which A 2 you have just read into the record? 3 A. Yes, it a p p e a r s to be. 4 MR. S P E I G H T S : I ask t h a t be m a r k e d as 5 p l a i n t i f f ' s Exhibit 12. 6 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked plaintiff's Deposiiion Exhibit No. 12 7 8 for identification, as of 7 -- 29 -- 86 .) 9 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: . 1 0 Q. Would you read the first two paragraphs^ of 1 1 :hat response? 1 2 A. "United States Gypsum Company (hereinafter 1 3 c a l l e d 'U S G ' ) r e s p o n d s to the 'notice' i n t e r r o g a t o r y 1 4 p r o p o u n d e d b y tire H o n o r a b l e w i l l 1 a m W. W i l k i n s on. 1 5 January 9, 1 9 8 4 as f o l l o w s : 1 6 A thorough review of USG files and 1 7 r e c o r d s w h i c h c o u l d be i d e n t i f i e d as p o s s i b i l i t y . 1 8 containing inf o rmation encompassed by this 1 9 interrogatory reveals that on or about September 3 20 19 4 8 , is t he e a r l i e s t d o c u m e n t e d d a t e u p o n w h i c h U SG 2 1 or any of its o f f i c e r s , e m p l o y e e s or a g e n t s in an - z z individual or corporate capacity first became 1 z z suspicious cr 2 4 a n d c^rJ-i-tocLats-i, d J n c. '312: 7S2-S0S7 68 1 Q. Now, Ms. Torrey, would you agree with me 2 that you did not reveal the letter from Mr. Brown to 3 Mr. O f f u t t of 1937 or the first p r o g r e s s re p o r t or 4 the J e r s e y C i t y s t u d y p r e p a r e d by Dr. G a r d n e r in 5 1936 in r e s p o n s e to the c o u r t ' s i n t e r r o g a t o r y ? 6 A. T h ose d o c u m e n t s were not p r o d u c e d or 7 i d e n t i f i e d in r e s p o n s e to the c o u r t ' s i n t e r r o g a t o r y , 8 correct. 9 Q. Did you s p e c i f i c a l l y discuss with Mr. 1 0 Snell whether he should revisit the issue of w h e ther 1 1 these docum e n t s should be revealed in light of Judge 12 Wilkins' ruling? 1 3 A. I gave Mr. Snell a copy of <_he draf l 14 response which had been prepared along with copies 1 5 of the docum e n t s we were p r o p o s i n g to identiL\ cr.d 1 6 produce and raised with him the que s t i o n of the K.eck 17 documents. 1 8 Q. And was Mr. Snell's p o s i t i o n i_he same, 1 9 that is, that those d o c u m e n t s should not be re\ea l e d ? 2 0 A. His p o s i t i o n was the same, t h a u the proper 2 1 response on behalf of the c o m pany would include * 2 2 d o c u m e n t s which were United States Gyp s u m Compar.;. 23 documents, and that in his opinion, again, these_ - 2 4 were not United States G y p s u m C o m p a n y a o c u.ue r.-s . r WM QVotfe., c^oizn(?"Uj a n d c r f iio c ia tc i., {Jnc. k i CQ--QO, t h r . c U ( 3 1 2 ) 7 E 2 - S : S 7 6 9 1 Q. And, again, that was his j u d g m e n t ? / 2 A . Correct. 3 Q. Did you p r o v i d e or refer to the 1943 4 o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n in r e s p o n s e -.o Judge W i l k i n s ' 5 notice interrogatory? 6 A. It does not appear on the list, no. 7 Q. A d d i t i o n a l l y on the second page, you refer 8 to the Saranac study or the m e m o r a n d u m of agr e e m e n t . 9 Would you read that part of the p a r a g r a p h 1 0 tome? 1 1 A. " A d d i t i o n a l l y , USG is a w a r e of a 1 2 ' m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t ' d a t e d N o v e m b e r 20, 1936 1 3 p r o d u c e d in oth e r l i t i g a t i o n w h i c h s u g g e s t s t h a u USG 1 4 may have c o n t r i b u t e d to a study c o n d u c t e d by Dr. - 1 5 Le Roy G a r d n e r at S a r a n a c Lake L a b o r a t o r y c o m m e n c i n g 1 6 in 1936. H o w e v e r , a s i n d i c a t e d on t h e l i s t i n g , U,S 1 7 c o u l d not c o n f i r m whe t h e r or to w h a t e x t e n t it m a y 1 8 ha v e part ic ipate d in the s t u d y or r e c e i v e d the 19 findings." 2 0 Q. Now, I b elieve s hortly after that you 2 1 stated earlier you att e n d e d the trial of -he 2 2 L e x i n g t o n case in South C a r o l i n a ? 2 3 A. Yes. 2 4 Q. And curing that trial, Le x i n g t o n ' s w T <"V('o [fz, and C"2h.ic.aQO, 0*~tinoLi (312} ^S2-8a ' ,O n e . 7 0 1 ittorneys attempted to introduce the memorandum of 2 agreement and the certain reports of Dr. Gardner. 3 >o y o u r e c a l l t h a t ? 4 A. i recall that you attempted to introduce 5 in t he '36 a g r e e m e n t . W h i c h of the o t h e r d o c u m e n t s 6 /ou a t t e m p t e d to i n t r oduce, I do not recall. 7 q . would you agree with me that U.S. Gypsum s 8 local counsel while you were present resisted any,, 9 connection between U . S . Gypsum and Saranac during 10 that trial? 1 1 A . No 1 2 Q. You would not agree with that? 1 3 A. No, I w o u l d not. If you would li k e to 1 4 show me a t r a n s c r i p t of the trial p r o c e e d i n g s anc 1 5 r e f r e s h my m e m o r y , I would be h a p p y to r e v i e w it, 1 6 but that's not my r e c o l l e c t i o n of the d i s c u s s i o n a 1 7 the trial. 1 5 q . W e l l , I don't have ranscript with me, 1 9 but I'll certainly discuss that with Morgan, Lewis & 20 Bockius counsel who were also counsel ai_ ^he ^ 2 1 Lexington trial. ^ 22 In addition to Judge Wilkins' notice 2 3 interrogatory, I believe Greenville followed up with 2 4 a special interrogatory inquiring as to wr. ere t n e n Vo [ f t, R o t i n i - a n d c d f L i O c i a t c i .,{ j n z . (OHi-caao, fjiiincii- (312; /C^-h-C/ 7 1 1 documents that were produced had been found? - t 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Is that a copy of chat special 4 interrogatory and U.S. Gypsum company's response? 5 A. Before we get to this, I feel co n s t r a i n e d 6 to point out since you're trying to create a clear 7 record, the q u e stion you raised to me about the 8 Lexington trial was did we dispute any connection *" t 9 with Saranac. I am d isputing your c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n 10 of what the controversy was. ... 1 1 you certainly -- plaintiff's attorneys for 1 2 Lex i n g t o n certainly attempted to introduce the 1 3 m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t and other d o c u m e n t s in at 1 4 trial. But I think you need to refer to what the. 1 5 argument was as to the basis of United States G y p s u m 1 6 Company's objection and its argument. .. 1 7 q . Would you agree with me that during that 1 8 trial and indeed prior to that trial, U.S. Gypsum 19 did not acknowledge any past relationship with 20 S a r a n a c in the ' 3 0 s or the =0s? . 2 1 A. Net witr. r e s p e c t to asbestos, and the 2 2 q u e s t i o n s that were posed were always related iO 2 3 a s b e s t o s . T h e q u e s t i o n y o u 're r a i s i n g is any 2 4 r e l a t i o n s h i p v;11 n S an a c w na t so ev Hi offz, ezffoi.znisz.iq a n J c f f j- a c c ia tz i, fin e . aac, La'riLi^o rj*2' 7S2-8CS7 72 1 ls b e st o s . A 2 Q. Okay. L e t 's get the que s t i o n straight. 3 W o u l d y o u a g r e e w i t h rr.e t h a t d u r i n g t h e 4 :rial of the L e x i n g t o n case, L e x i n g t o n ' s a t t o r n e y s 5 attempted to introduce a connection between U.S. 6 d y p s u m and S a r a n a c in r e g a r d to a s b e s t o s s t u d i e s ? 7 A. The plaintiff's attorneys for L exington 8 attempted to introduce into evidence the m e m o r a n d u m 9 of a g r e e m e n t , and I seem to r e c a l l c e r t a i n o t her _ 1 0 documents relating to the Sumner Simpson papers and 1 1 perhaps the entire Sumner Simpson file. 1 2 Q. Which dealt with asbestos? 1 3 A. Relating to asbestos. 1 4 Q. And would you also agree with me that U.S. 1 5 G y p s u m ' s a t t o r n e y s at the trial of the L e x i n g t o n 1 6 c a s e w i t h y o u in a t t e n d a n c e did not acknov;ledge any 1 7 past relationship between U.S. Gypsum and Saranac m 1 8 regards to a s b estos? 1 9 A. The legal objection raised that I reca_l 20 was one of a u t h e n t i c a t i o n of the d o c u m e n t s you were 2 1 attempting to introduce into evidence. 22 Q. For whan other reason weald you agree tnao 2 3 U.S. Gypsum did not acknowledge any past 2 4 relationship between Sara na U . S . G' ,, " O .V offz, < a R o i z n (jzzzj a n d C.nica a o , ddCi-ncit 0 a T T i z o c i a t z i ,O r- '312, 7S2-5 73 1 as a s b e s t o s ? 2 A. That q u estion I can't respond to wit h o u t 3 referring to the transcript. I recall that the 4 b a s i s cf the o b j e c t i o n was one of a u t h e n t i c a t i o n of 5 t h e d e c urne nt s a n d it w a s l i m i t e d to t h a t i s s u e . 6 Q. Now, let me re v i e w , b e c a u s e we k ind of get 7 o f f b a s e . On J a n u a r y 9, J u d g e W i l k i n s i s s u e d his 8 i n t e r r o g a t o r y w h i c h USG r e s p o n d e d to in e a r l y * 9 F e b r u a r y . L e x i n g t o n , I b e l i e v e was t r i e d in e a r l y 1 O A p r i l , is t h a t y o u r r e c o l l e c t i o n ? 1 1 A . Yes. 1 2 Q. On April 23, .S. G y p s u m responded to the 1 3 s p e c i a l i n t e r r o g a t o r y w h i c n G r e e n v i l l e served on 1 4 U.S. G y p s u m a s k i n g a b o u t the s o u r c e of the d o c u m e n t s 1 5 it had p r o d u c e d , c o r r e c t ? 1 6 A . Ye s . 1 7 MR. SPEIGHTS: I'm going to ask that this 1 8 interrogatory, special interrogatory and U.S. Gypsum's 1 9 r e s p o n s e be m a r k e d c o l l e c t i v e l y as P l a i n t i f f ' s 20 E x h i b i t 13. 2 1 2 2 2 3 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked < P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x n i b i t No. i-, for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) ' 2 4 3Y MR. SP E I G H T S : < W / , a n d c d -ftio c la tzi., {Jn c. CZicaao, Otiir.cU e (312)7e2-SCS7 7 4 1 Q. D i d y o u c o o r d i n a t e t h i s r e s p o n s e , t h a ^ is, 2 to the special interrogatory? 3 A. No, I d i d n ' t . I was a w a r e of it and I 4 r e v i e w e d it, but -- in the b r o a d sen s e , I 5 c o o r d i n a t e d it, b u t I d i d n ' t p r e p a r e i l.. 6 Q. Would you agree with me that this document 7 r e f l e c t s t h a t USG did not c o n d u c t a r e v i e w in d e t a i l 8 of the box found by Donna W o o d r u f f and b r o u g h t tc 9 the legal department until after.^Judge Wilkins' _ 1 0 o r d e r of J a n u a r y 9, 1 9 8 4 ? - 1 1 A. v t h i n k the only way I can respond to that 1 2 is by r e a d i n g th a t p o r t i o n of the r e s p o n s e . The 1 3 order entered by this court was far oroader than 1 4 discovery previo usl y responded to by this defendant. 1 5 B e c a u s e of its b r e a d t h , t h i s d e f e n d a n t was r e q u i r e d 1 6 to s e e k to d e t e r m i n e t h e e x i s t e n c e of f i l e s n o t .. 1 7 p r e v i o u s l y known to exist and to searcn through many 1 8 files net p r e v i o u s l y reviewed. This e x plains the 1 9 p r o d u c t i o n of d o c u m e n t s h e r e i n w h i c n this d e f e n d a n t 20 believes not fall within plaintiff's previous 2 1 discovery requests. 2 2 The e x i s t e n c e cf a box c o n t a i n i n g one 23 f o l l o w i n g d o c u m e n t s 'was d e t e r m i n e d b y (a) D o n n a _ - 2 4 W o o d r u f f , U S G p a r a l e g a l or (b ; a p p r a >:i m a t e _ g * HiVoift., and czr~li.i~czLa.tzi., Lfin {2r.ic.azic, S^Lh-ncii % (312}76i-BOBr 75 1 J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y , 1980. T h i s b o x (C) w a s c l e a r l y . 2 m a r k e d as p e r t a i n i n g s o l e l y to s i l i c o s i s in the USG 3 c o r p o r a t e f i l e s s t o r a g e f a c i l i t y l o c a t e d at 101 4 South Kacker Drive. 5 The file within which the documents were 6 l o c a t e d w a s (D) a b o x of i n s u r a n c e d e p a r t m e n t p a p e r s , 7 specifically entitled' Miscellaneous Workman's 8 Compensation Data -- Silicosis Cases. ' The 9 c u s t o d i a n of t h e d o c u m e n t s at t h^e t i m e t h e y w e r e ^ 1 0 l o c a t e d w a s (e) D o r o t h y L i t t l e j o h n , f i l e s . 1 1 Because this box was clearly labeled 1 2 ' s i l i c o s i s ' t h e y w e r e n e v e r r e v e a l e d in d e t a i l for i 3 in f o r m a t i o n relating to asbestos until this 1 4 d e f e n d a n t u n d e r t o o k a more e x t e n s i v e review of 1 5 d o c u m e n t s in o r d e r to c o m p l y as f u l l y as p o s s i b l e 1 6 with Judge Wilkins' order and therefore included.. 1 7 t n i s b o x in its s e a r c h . 1, ' 1 8 Q. And that s e a r c h of the box was made 1 9 s o m e t i m e in e a r l y 1984? 20 A . Ye s . . 2 1 Q. And t h a t b o o k s c o n t a i n e c some of Mr. 2 2 Kipp's papers? 23 A . T h e r e are p a o e r s in t h e r e w h i c h I r e c a l l r 24 a n d I w o u l d h a v e to r e f e r to t h e li n g <W/2 tz/^oi.zn(!re.rg a n d a d f i t o z L a t z i , j j n c . h.Uato, iCir.oU O (3 1 2 ) 782-3057 7 6 1 e i t h e r sent to or a u t h o r e d by Mr. Kip p . I w o u l d not 2 c h a r a c t e r i z e them as Mr. Kipp's papers. 3 Q. Would you read that parag r a p h for me? 4 A. " Shortly before his d eath in 1980, C.P. 5 Kipp then manager insurance stated that USG was not 6 a member of the A s b e s t o s Cement Produ c e r s 7 A s s o c i a t i o n although he had attended a few m e e t i n g s 8 for his personal information only. ' 9 A s e a r c h w a s m a d e for t h e s e d o c u m e n t s in 1 0 February, 1984 by S.K. Torrey specifically for the 1 1 p u r p o s e of r e s p o n d i n g to the n o t i c e i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s 12 heretofore propounded." 1 3 Q. Now, 1 want to refer b ack to - 1 4 A. E x c u s e me, but the q u e s t i o n you p o s e d ^o 1 5 me was were the Kipp papers -- the Kipp rile m 1 6 that bo x . " 1 7 q. I understand that was the previous - 1 8 question . 1 9 A . All right. 20 Q. And you r e s p o n d e d to it and the n I a s k e d 2 1 you t 0 read a n o t h e r s e c t i o n of this order w h ich 2 2 ref e r s to K i p p p a p e r s as well. 2 3 A . All right, fine. - 2 4 r\ Now, r war. ^ ^v ra -- a . b a c k to Ex hi b it S ,, \W/A nthy, ze.n.z.'Uj and c A .iociatzi., Cniccao, i u n c U e !312.'7C2-8CS7 7 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 23 2 4 ^ i c h is t h e M a r c h 24 , 1 98 2 m e m o f r o m y o u to Mr., nell and ask you to read that paragraph. A. " F i n a l l y , as I s h o w e d y o u , t h e r e is o r r e s p o n d e n c e in some old f i les m a i n t a i n e d by the n s u r a n c e d e p a r t m e n t tha t Mr. K i p p in 1953 e m b a r k e d pon a project to gather a r t icles c o n cerning sbestosis ." Q. In a d d i t i o n to t h a t s p e c i a l i n t e r r o g a t o r y , believe Judge Wilkins issued another order after .he L e x i n g t o n t r i a l in A p r i l of 19 8 4 . Do y o u r e c a l l .ha t ? A. Q. Yes. A n d t h a t is w h a t is s o m e t i m e s b e e n e f e r r e d to as an e n c o m p a s s m e n t order? A . Yes. Q. Is tha t a copy of t h a t o r d e r ? . A . Ye s . MR. SPEIGHTS: ' I w o u l d ask t h a t be m a r k e d as E x h i b i t 14. (WHEREUPON, said document was marked P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t N c . * 14 , for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as or 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) BY MR. SPEIGHTS: Q Let me s; I can c h a r a c t e r ! 70 n iq and. CL.Uc.zc, O liinoU e (312)?'52-S0S7 , One. 1 o r d e r w i t h o u t r e a d i n g it and if y o u f e e l c o m p e l l e d 2 to read it, t h a t ' s fine. 3 Would you agree with me that Judge Wilkins 4 required -- strike that. Would you read paragraph 2 5 of that order, please? 6 A. "The d e f e n d a n t s h a l l on cr b e f o r e M ay 14, 7 1984 file their final responses to the p l a i n t i f f ' s 8 request to produce docu m e n t s together with a 9 s t a t e m e n t v e r i f i e d b y t h e p a r t i e^s s p e c i f i c a l l y _ 1 0 s e t t i n g f o r t h the e n c o m p a s s m e n t of the s e a r c h , the 1 1 p e r s o n or p e r s o n s w h o p a r t i c i p a t e d in the s e a r c h and 1 2 the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of all d o c u m e n t s for w h i c h they 1 3 claim privilege." 1 4 Q. In r e s p o n s e to that, did you p e r s o n a l l y 1 5 file an a f f i d a v i t in c o m p l i a n c e w i t h o- strike 1 6 that . - 1 7 In res p o n s e to J u d g e Wilkins' order in-or 1 8 a r o u n d A p r i l 25, 1984 m a r k e d as p x h i b i ^ 14, die y o u 1 9 re and file an a f f i d a v i t ? 2 0 A . Yes. 2 1 Q Is t h a t a c e p y cf t h e a f f i d a v i t ? 2 2 A . In part. 2 3 MR . SPEIGHTS: Let's co off the record 2 4 (W HEREUPON', d i s c u s s i o n w a s h a d OrVoffi, and cd^iicciaU i, {Jnc. d n i z a a c , J j d m o i t (312( 782-8j 8 y 79 1 off the record.) 2 3Y MR. S P E I G H T S : 3 Q. Is that a c o p y of the a f f i d a v i t you f i l e d 4 in r e s p o n s e to J u d g e W i l k i n s ' o r d e r ? 5 A . Yes. 6 MR. S P E I G H T S : I ask tha t be m a r k e d as 7 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 15. 8 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 9 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s^i t i o n E x h i b i t No ,^ 15, 1 0 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of ,'-29-86.) 1 1 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 2 Q. I w o u l d a s k y o u to r e a d p a r a g r a p h 9. 1 3 A. "At p r e s e n t , no o t h e r d o c u m e n t s h a v e beer, 1 4 loca t e d responsive to p l a i n t i f f ' s request to pr o d u c e 1 5 d a t e d J a n u a r y 13, 1983 as q u a l i r i e d by o u t s t a n d i n g 1 6 o b j e c t i o n s and e x c l u d i n g p r i v i l e g e d d o c u m e n t s , if. 1 7 any, and as a l r e a d y d i s c l o s e d in U n i t e d S t a t e s - 1 8 G y p s u m C o m p a n y ' s s u p p l e m e n t a l r e s p o n s e s or 1 9 p reviously produced to p l ai n tif f' s counsel witrout 20 f o r m a l s u p p l e m e n t a t i o n e t h e r t h a n the a t t a c h e d wh.icn 2 1 was 1 o c a t e d r e c e n t l y . 1! 2 2 Q. Now, at rha i_ X L. ime had you, by that I me a r. 2 3 you, u .s G y p s u m , pro due e d 0 it h er P l a i n t i f f ' s ' 2 4 Exhi bit 2 , the 3 ro wn ~ o 0 i rutt letter, P l a i ntiff W/A& <w/*, d^om nije.'U j a n d c d J - lto c L n tz t, Cf-.uaao, i u r . o i i .'312.' 7'52-::^ 80 1 E x h i b i t 3, t h e f i r s t p r o g r e s s r e p o r t , or P l a i n t i f f s 2 E x h i b i t 5, t h e J e r s e y C i t y s t u d y of Dr. G a r d n e r ? 3 A. No . 4 Q. At t h a t t i m e , did y ou l i s t or at any t i m e 5 b e f o r e had you l i s t e d any of t h ose three d o c u m e n t s 6 as being p r i v i l e g e d ? 7 A . No . 8 Q. At t h a t t i m e , had you p r o v i d e d a c o p y of 9 t h e 1943 o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n w h i c^h we h a v e p r e v i o u s l y 1 0 marked? 1 1 A . No . 1 2 Q. W h a t is t h e d a t e of t h a t a f f i d a v i t , p l e a s e , 1 3 Miss Tor rey? 1 4 A. May 25th, 1984. ' 1 5 q . i believe within several weeks, that the 1 6 boxes which vou now believe Ms. Woodruff originally 1 7 l o c a t e d in 1980 we r e l o c a t e d by an a t t o r n e y w o r k i n g 1 8 under you at the time? 1 9 A. G a r y Smit h , an a t t o r n e y in the d e p a r t m e n t , 20 found in the w a r e h o u s e s o m e w h e r e in the p e r i o d June rt o 2 1 15th June 20th, '84 t h r e e b o x e s w h i c h we now A 22 *2 ]_0 V a b a s e d u o o n the r e c e n t l y - f o u n d Don n a W o o d r u f 2 3 m e m o zo h a v e seen f o u n d by her in 1980. _ J r 24 I Q. Anc in t h o s e t h r e e b o x e s , among o u n e r ,, UW i ^\\ 'oif-s., <z^oi.&nlrz.%} and zdfiiccLaizi, dJnc. C n ic a a o , L im e it (3 1 2J 7S2-S0S7 8 1 1 things, were l o c a t e d p l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t s 6 and 7, A 2 that is, the s u m m a r y of the J e r s e y City report and 3 the letter forwarding the summary and the report to 4 the law firm? 5 A. I have been told that. 6 q. I'm going to show you another document 7 dated S e p t e m b e r 16, 1936 and ask w h e t h e r that was 8 also l o c a t e d in the' t h r e e b o x e s ? 9 A. I don't know from personal knowledge. I 1 0 b e l i e v e t h a t t h a t ' s w h e r e is it c a m e from. I h a v e 1 1 been told that, but I don't know. 1 2 Q. Let me give you a series of five documents 1 3 and a s k if it is y o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t t h o s e f i v e 1 4 documents were -- - 1 5 A. I think I have to first point out that- 1 6 when the boxes were discovered, once Gary had _ 1 7 pointed out to me the e x i s t e n c e of the J e r s e y City 1 8 s t u d y and I c o n f i r m e d that it was the J e r s e y City 1 9 study, I did not tnorougnly review the contents of 20 the box. 2 1 I p r e t t y m u c h s t o p p e d at that point. se 2 2 al! v c c n ' t have p e r s o n a l k n o w l e d g e or t:ieir 2 3 c o n t e n t s . I nave b e e n told t r.a t t h e r e was some 2 4 o r ^ e s o n d e n c e in tr.ese o o x e -0 - - - -i- c to some sort WM oLtz.t c^ozzn&s.'ia and c^df-ttacLatzi. , One. Cki-.aao, DiLr.oii. 6 '2'2] 7^2-zZ" 82 1 >f a l a w s u i t t h a t d i d n ' t d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e t h e . A. 2 :ompany. 3 I a s s u m e t h a t t h e s e are thos- and it c a m e 4 jut of the boxes, but I don't know that p erson a l l y . 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: I'm going to have them m a r k e d 6 and if we can not w o r k out a s t i p u l a t i o n l a t e r , j 11 7 indepen dentl y deal with the situation. But since I 8 have shown them to you, I want to mark them for the 9 record and I ask they be m a r k e d . a s follows: _ 1 0 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 16 is a l e t t e r f r o m 1 1 3.C. S c h a r w a t h to H.R . B a r r e t t . I t ' s n o t e d a^ L.he 1 2 top, "Copy, United States Gyps u m Company" dated 1 3 S e p t e m b e r 16, 1937. 1 4 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 5 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i o i u No. 16, 1 6 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 -29 -8 6 .,.) 1 7 MR. S P E I G H T S : E x h i b i t 17, a letter from - 1 8 A s s i s t a n t To P r e s i d e n t to J.A. S c h a r w a t h on U.S. 1 9 G y p s u m C o m p a n y l e t t e r h e a d d a t e d S e p t e m b e r 29, 1937. 2 0 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 2 1 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit N o . *17, 2 2 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as or 7 - 2 9 - 8 o . > 2 3 m r . S P E I G H T S : E x h i b i t 18, a l e t t e r r r c m J . S . ' 2 4 Offutt, Assistant to Pre s i d e n t , to Scott, M ackers & a v o ifc , cJ ^ o te.n C 'S .'Uj Ch.uzcc, a n d c --f n o c i a U i ,O n e . e ?3i2) 7c2-?r?7 8 3 1 Falk which we have been referring to as the Keck law 2 firm, on U.S. Gyp s u m Company letterhead dated 3 September 29, 1937. 4 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 5 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit No. 18, 6 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . , 7 MR. S P E I G H T S : E x h i b i t 19 is a l e t t e r f r o m J o h n 8 J. C u n e o C u n e o of J e r s e y City, to t h e K e c k l a w f i r m 9 dated October 8 , 1937 . v, . 1 0 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 1 P l a i n t i f f 's D e p o s i t i o n Exhibit No. 19 f 1 2 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as of 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 1 3 MR. S P E G I H T S : E x h i b i t 20 is a l e t t e r f r o m an 1 4 u n i d e n t i f i e d s o u r c e u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e iden.-j._ied in 1 5 m h e b o d y to J o h n J. C u n e o d a t e d O c t o b e r 2 8 , 1 9 3 7'. 1 6 (WHEREUPON, said document was marked 1 7 P l a i n t i f f ' s D e p o s i t i o n E x h i b i t No.- 20 1 8 for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as or 7 - 2 9 - 8 6 . ) 1 9 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 2 0 Q. Would you agree with me from reacinc l.he se 2 1 documents that they report an allegation than 2 2 someone who was a b o o k k e e p e r at the Jersey City 23 olar.t sustained ash :-s*:osis? 2 4 I a id n ' ea _ " W oil. ^ IV o ij'Z , c z f f o z z n i z 'i j cm d . c.A j i . z o c . i o . t z i , J n c . ( 31 2.' 84 1 it be e a s i e r if I j u s t read t h i s p a r a g r a p h ? 2 Q. Yes, just do tha 3 A. "For my dad, ask if you w o u l d care to h e l p 4 him w i t h a rev i e w of the G y p s u m C o m p a n y ' s e x p e r i e n c e 5 w ith s i l i c o s i s or a s b e s t o s i s . R e c a l l that you had 6 told me about several cases that the company had and 7 he now has a suit against him by a former assi s t a n t 8 b o o k k e e p e r of the old N a t i o n a l A s b e s t o s C o m p a n y 9 whose desk at least more than 2 0 0 feet away from any 1 0 o t h e r m a c h i n e r y as well as b e i n g s e g r e g a t e d in the 1 1 office from the factory." 1 2 MR. SPEIGHTS: Let me take a break just a 1 3 m i n u t e . I b e l i e v e t h a t ' s going to be all. 1 4 (WHEREUPON, a recess was had.) 1 5 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 6 C. M i s s T o r r e y , I u n d e r s t a n d t h a t on Aug us; 1 7 20, 1984, you ceas e d any i n v o l v e m e n t with the 1 8 d e f e n s e of a s b e s t o s i s , e i t h e r p e r s o n a l i n j u r y or 1 9 property damage? 2 0 A . Yes. 2 1 Q. And p r i o r to t h a t d a t e , you did no 22 2 3 Wilkins? 2 4 here was no s u p p l m e n t a 85 1 m o d i f i c a t i o n of the a f f i d a v i t , that s c o r r e c t . 2 Q. And tc your k n o w l e d g e , there was no 3 s u p p l e m e n t a t i o n or m o d i f i c a t i o n to the r e s p o n s e s to 4 discovery, Judge Wilkins' discovery between the time 5 y o u f i l e d t h o s e in the s p r i n g of '84 until August 2 ( , 6 1 9 84 ? 7 A. T h ere was none filed, no. 8 MR. SPEIGHTS: Thank you. Tnat's all I have. 9 MR. CALE: I have a few questions. . 1 0 EXAMINATION 1 1 BY MR. CALE: 1 2 q . Ms. T o r r e y , I w o u l d as k yo u a g a i n to look 1 3 at the series of d o c u m e n t s that c o u n s e l has marked 1 4 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 16 t h r o u g h P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h ib it 1 5 20 and d i r e c t y o u r a t t e n t i o n to the d o c u m e n 1 6 P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 20 w h i c h I b e l i e v e is t h e . - 1 7 r e s p o n s e of s o m e o n e to Mr. J o h n J . Cuneo, t h e - 1 8 a t t o r n e y for Mr. S c h a r w s u h r e p l y i n g to his letter of 1 9 O c t o b e r 8tn w h i c h was m a r k e d as P l a i n t i f f ' s Exh ib it 2 0 1 9 , and I would ask you if you would read into th.e 2 1 record jus t the fir st sentence of t h e beg inning * 2 2 p a rag raDh on page 2 of that le tier? 23 A . 11W ^ \~l2,V6 not had occ a s i c r. t c de fend an y 2 4 case broucn soestcsi r ' e ci one .*o WMi Q V o lfz, r ILL, a n d z d f i i o c L a t z i ,jJ n c 86 1 r e c o g n i z e d dise a s e s resulting from the b r e a c h i n g of 2 dangerous dust, the other being silicosis. 3 Q . Thank you. 4 MR. S P E I G H T S : C o u l d I ask the d a t e of t h a t ? 5 BY MR. CALE: 6 Q. Also on this e x hibit, are there i n i t i a l s 7 of the author of that letter and the typist? 8 A. Ye s . ' 9 Q. And what are those initials? . 1 0 A. C M P a n d t h e t y p i s t ' s i n i t i a l s a r e IC. .. 1 1 Q. A n d is the l e t t e r to w h i c h t h a t is a 1 2 r e s p o n s e P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 19 a d d r e s s e d to C h a r l e s 1 3 M. P r i c e w h o s e i n i t i a l s are C M P ? 1 4 A . Yes . v 1 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: W o u l d you mind her stating the 1 6 date of that letter b e f o r e you move to ano t h e r 1 7 subject? ' 1 8 BY M R . CALE : 1 9 Q. C o u l d y o u t e l l us t h e d a t e or t n a t l e t t e r , 20 please, Exhibit 20? 2 1 A. O c t o b e r 28, 1937. 2 2 Q . To your k n o w l e d g e , by the way, W a S John J . 2 3 Cun e o of 9 2 1 B e r g e n A v e n u e , Jer sey City, N e w J e r s e -.- 24 an att o rrley w o r k i n g for U r.ir e a S o a r e s Gy c s u m Cor.pjr. y ? \W?/a n vo C fi, cJ^oi.tzn.ljcxc] cu tA (z A j-iio c ia -tz t,{ J n z . CF-.Uaac, jJttir.cU C (312) 7E2-S0S7 7 1 A . I'm not aware that he was. 2 Q. I now show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 5 which 3 we have r e f e r r e d to as the J e r s e y Ci t y s t u d y and I 4 believe plaintiff's counsel had you read into tie 5 r e c o r d a p a r a g r a p h a p p e a r i n g on page 4 w h i c h reads 6 as follows: "The a u t h o r s of the report c o n c l u d e 7 t h a t it is not p o s s i b l e f r o m t h e i r f i n d i n g s to 8 e s t a b l i s h the m a x i m u m safe c o n c e n t r a t i o n of a s b e s t o s 9 d u s t in the air." . 1 O F o l l o w i n g t h a t p a r a g r a p h , t h e r e is a n o t h e r 1 1 p a r a g r a p h in the report on page 5 and I would ask 1 2 t h a t you read the f i r s t full p a r a g r a p h on page 5 of 1 3 that report. 1 4 A. " W h i l e a s b e s t o s i s may be a m i l d e r type of 1 5 :i b r o s i s t h a n is s i l i c o s i s , it d o e s n o t a p p e a r f r o m 1 6 the studies mentioned above that a standard for a 1 7 s a f e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of a s b e s t o s d u s t w o u l d pe rm it -a 1 8 g re aoer concentration than the value already given 1 9 for free s i l i c a du s t . It is q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e 2 O safe limit m i g h t be e ven lower for a s b e s t o s than for 2 1 ; i For p r e s e n t , it w o u l d s e e m b .o a t e m e 2 3 tc k e e n the c o n c e n t r a t i ; n cf a s b e s t o s le s s on e*r. 2 4 c h a n 5 m i l l i o n o a r t i c l e s ner c u b i c c ot or a i ^ IV c L je., <zfK>oi.znC'.rj a n d CHiz O.QO, n.\Lrri,r,.CLi. $ czrj-< L o cia t, iJ n c . r2 1 2 7 S 2 - S 0 2 7 88 1 counted by light field examination." 2 Q. Counsel also had asked about the Lexington 3 t r i a l and p o s i t i o n of the c o m p a n y at that t r i a l with 4 respect to its r e l a t i o n s h i p with Saranac Lake 5 Laboratory? 6 A . Yes. 7 Q. At t he t i m e of the L e x i n g t o n t r i a l , ha d a 8 copy of the 1949 final report of the a s b e s t o s 9 s t u d i e s done at S a r a n a c L a k e been. i d e n t i t i e d and _ 1 0 provi d e d to p l a i n t i f f ' s counsel? 1 1 A . Yes. 1 2 Q. And in w h a t case was t h a t final r e p o r t 1 3 provided? 1 4 A. Greenville. ' 1 5 Q. A n d t h a t w a s p r i o r to the t r i a l of the 16 Lexington case? 1 7 A. Ye s . ' 1 8 Q. in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n s abouv. i.he 1 9 fin d i n g of c e r t a i n of the d o c u m e n t s that have been 20 i d e n t i f i e d h e r e by D o n n a W o o d r u f f in 1980, w ere you 2 1 at tha t tim e in the p r o c e s s of r e s p o n d i n g to any 2 2 d i s c o v e r y r e q u e s t s in p r o p e r t y d a m a g e l i t i g a t i o n ? 2 3 A. No. . " 2 4 >. And w e r e c h o s e d o c u m n e s ai tna t c i m e ,, WM <"Uoffz, ril-nnn arJ. crfttcc.ia.Ui., LInc. Oilinoll G '2 12 '72-S 0S " 8 9 1 r e q u i r e d to be p r o d u c e d p u r s u a n t to any d i s c o v e r y 2 re q u e s t s in p r o p e r t y dama g e l i t i g a t i o n ? 3 A . No . 4 Q. R e f e r r i n g now to P l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t 9 5 w h i c h is y o u r m e m o r a n d u m to Mr. S n e l l d i s c u s s i n g 6 c e r t a i n o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n s of the c o m p a n y , I w o u l d 7 d i r e c t your a t t e n t i o n to the s e c o n d page of that 8 m e m o r a n d u m and ask you to read into the record the 9 second full paragraph? v, . 1 O A. "T h e s e c o n d b u l l e t i n w h i c h has s u r f a c e d is 1 1 a n o t h e r o p e r a t i n g b u l l e t i n w h i c h is l a b e l e d 1 2 h a z a r d o u s c h e m i c a l u s e d in p a i n t m a n u f a c t u r e . 1^ is 1 3 Nc . 602 and was p r o m u l g a t e d on 8-11-48. The 1 4 historical file copy carries the notation 'expired' 15 by the section which refers to asbestos." 1 6 Q. Are you famil ia r with that bulle tin? . 1 7 A . Yes, I am. 1 8 Q. Can you t ell u s in e s s e n c e what it s t a t e s ? 1 9 A . W i t h r e s p e c t t 0 a s b e s t o s , it on t h e 2 O le f th and c o l u m n s f a t e s the t e r m a sbe s tos and in the 2 1 n e X _ c o l u m n , p u r p crts to di s c u s s the dise ase 2 2 re sul ring and I b el leve con r a i n s lang urge to the 23 a f f DC t of p r o l o n g ed e x p o s ur e to t r e a t h ina a s b e s r o s - 2 4 a u c.*- can cau s e a d i s a b l i n g long rondi rien Kn o w n a ~ Q V oL fi, a n d C ^ iivcL a tzi, jjn c . /O - O' 70 90 1 asbe stos is . 2 Q. Was that document provided v oluntarily by 3 the c o m p a n y in res p o n s e to a d i s c o v e r y request 4 s e r v e d in a s b e s t o s p r o p e r t y d a m a g e l i t i g a t i o n ? 5 A . Yes. 6 Q. And can you tell us a p p r o x i m a t e l y when 7 that d o c u m e n t was fir s t p r o d u c e d to any p l a i n t i f f in 8 the property damage asbestos litigation? 9 A. June, 1983. , .. 1 O Q. And do you k n o w in w h i c h case and to w h i c h 1 1 plaintiff's counsel that document was produced? 1 2 A. I b e l i e v e it was G r e e n v i l l e L e x i n g t o n , bur 1 3 we could check the records. 1 4 W h o w o u l d c o u n s e l h a v e b e e n in t h a t case 1 5 for the plaintiff? 1 6 A. Mr. Speight 1 7 Q. And was that prior to udge Wilkins 1 8 entering his notice interrogatory? 1 9 A Yes 20 Q. And by approximately how many montos? 2 1 A Six, seven. 2 2 Q C o u n s e l r e f e r r e d to the c o c u m e n 2 3 appeared in the A s b e s t o s L 't i c a t i c n Reoor 2 4 believe represents n Q VoLj-z, cJ^oi.e.n& E .'Uj a n A < c A j - i t o c .u i t z i ,f i n e . 9 1 1 late '70s, the 1936 m e m o r a n d u m a g r e e m e n t and three 2 p r o g r e s s reports were included and reported on. Do 3 you recall the questions regarding that subject? 4 A . Yes. 5 Q. Do you recall the d a tes of those p r o g r e s s 6 r e p o r t s that were r e p o r t e d in the A s b e s t o s 7 L i t i g a t i o n Reporter at the time the 1936 m e m o r a n d u m 8 agreement was published? - 9 A. I believe they were all 1937. 1 0 Q. To your knowledge, was the 1943 m onograph 1 1 t h a t c o u n s e l has r e f e r r e d to r e p o r t e d in the 1 2 A s b e s t o s L i t i g a t i o n R e p o r t e r as one of t h ose 1 3 progress reports? 1 4 A. As one of the p r o g r e s s r e p o r t s , no. 1 5 Q. To y o u r k n o w l e d g e , h a s a c o p y of t h e 1943 1 6 m o n o g r a p h ever been l o c a t e d in any U n i t e d S t a t e s 1 7 Gyosum company file? 1 8 A. I nave never seen the 1943 monograph. I 1 9 h a v e n e v e r b e e n tol d t h a t it was f o u n d in any U n i t e d 2 0 States Gypsum Company file. I certainly never found 2 1 2 2 Q . R e fe r r ing to the 1936 agre emeno, does that 2 3 a g r e e m e n t i n d i c a t e ho w the 3.0 rGtrTiSn'u. came into bei n-g ? 2 4 A . Weil , ^ h b 50 coni p a r a g r a p h states, an WM tzJXoi.znijz.'Uj and cdJ'iiocLaizi., O r.,. dniccLGc, (312) 7 i2 `8087 9 2 1 r e a d i n g , "The g e n e r a l n a t u r e of t h e s e e x p e r i m e n t s 2 and the cost t h e r e o f were e x p l a i n e d at a m e e t i n g of 3 c e r t a i n b r a k e l i n i n g m a n u f a c t u r e r s h e l d in N e w Y o r k 4 C i t y on N o v e m b e r 19, 1936." 5 Q. Has United States G y p s u m Company to your 6 knowledge ever manufactured brake linings? 7 A . No . 8 Q. And does the memorandum agreement indicate 9 the period of time that the e x p e r i m e n t s are to be ^ 1 0 u n d e r w r i t t e n by the s i g n a t o r i e s to that agreem e n t ? 1 1 A. The next p a r a g r a p h states "for a p eriod of 1 2 three years." 1 3 Q. And the d a t e of the a g r e e m e n t is w h a t ? 1 4 A. N o v e m b e r 20, 19 3 6 . - 1 5 Q. And three years from that date would be 1 6 w h a t ? - 1 7 A . N o v e m b e r 2 0, 1 9 3 9 . 1 8 MR . CALE: Could we excuse ourselve s ? I only 1 9 have one m o r e q u e s t i o n . I jus t w a n t to m a k e sure 20 that we agr e e to get into it. 2 1 i-, S P E I G H Y S : Y 0 u w a n t to t a l k to h e r ? J" 2 2 MR . CALE: I just w a n t to h e r -- 2 3 MR . S P E I G H T S : I' m a b o u t as l i b e r a l . a s a n y b c c 2 4 I k n O W f d j : j. j u s *! oc r. >-- ~ h i o k i n ' s o r c rc.V 0 V*3 -- WM < \V c:u , 'Jx>o izn .C 'Z 'u] a n d c ^ - f ^ L O c i a z z i , d J n c .. 'HCwO, rzc. i (312' ?2- r 9 3 1 1 tfith the witness while you have got her under 2 examination. I can't physically stop you. 3 MR. CALE: Oh, I know. Okay. Let's just go 4 off the record for a minute. 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: Sure. 6 (WHEREUPON, discussion was had 7 off the record. ) 6 BY MR. CALE: " S Q. Ms. Torrey, counsel has e s t ablished that 1 0 at the time the answers were filed to Judge Wilkins' 1 1 notice interrogatory, the 1934 operating bulletin 1 2 with respect to dusty conditions was not identified 1 3 in the list of d o c u m e n t s p r o v i d e d . 1 4 A . Ye s . - 1 5 Q. Can you tell us why that was not included 1 6 as best you can recall? 1 7 A. I d i d n ' t r e a l i z e at t h e t i m e I w a s - 1 8 preparing the responses that that bulletin existed. 1 9 I had a paralegal assisting me and I asked that she 20 secure all the b u l l e t i n s on the x-ray program, ana I 2 1 s p e c i f i c a l l y recall asking her to ma.-ce sure tr.at we 22 had them all and to verity that we hac them ail anc 2 3 she informed me that we had them all and we proauc e-c 24 cnem . WM Cf-.iCCLCD, a n d c y d f i z o c i a t z i .,d J n c . 9 4 1 Looking at the '43 b u l l e t i n now, I see it A 2 bears a different bulletin number and I can 3 u n d e r s t a n d w h y it m a y not have b e e n g i v e n to her 4 when she asked for all of the x-ray bulletins. 5 T h e r e was no i n t e n t on o u r p a r t n o t tc p r o d u c e it. 6 I s i m p l y had f o r g o t t e n about the memo. If I had 7 known, I would have produced them irrespective of 8 the d ate . - 9 Q. Am 1 c o r r e c t that as of the date of the 1 0 a n s w e r s to the notice i n t e r r o g a t o r y , u n i t e d St a t e s 1 1 Gyosum had already some seven months before provided 1 2 a d o c u m e n t showing notice certain hazards of 1 3 a s b e s t o s as e a r l y as I 9 4 9? 14 ' Yes, and the '54 m e m o r a n d u m also refer re d 1 5 to in that m e m o r a n d u m was p r o d u c e d in r e s p o n s e as to 1 6 the notice interrogatory. _ 1 7 Q. Turning to 1983 when I believe you . 1 8 t e s t i f i e d t h a t at l e a s t the d o c u m e n t s - a r m e d as 1 9 p l a i n t i f f ' s E x h i b i t s 3 -- e x c u s e me -- 2, 3 and 5 20 w h i c h are the l e t t e r from Mr. B r o w n to Mr. O f f u t t , 2 1 -he first procress report and the Jersey City s -uoy , 2 2 that they were r e t u r n e d to the Kec k firm, co you 2 3 r e c a l l tr. at? ' 2 4 \W //A H i 'oLft, z z f? c tE .n i'z .'U) a n d Cni-aco, D la r .d i (2'2: ?e2- e: sr , Jnc. 9 5 1 Q. And could you tell us why they were 2 ref e r r e d to the Ke c k firm? 3 A. I was requested by Mr. Snell to have them 4 returned because they were Keck documents. They 5 were not documents of United States Gypsum Company 6 and he felt they belonged with the law firm. 7 Q. And I think you also testified that there 8 v;a s no inventory pr e p a r e d of those documents when 9 they were returned to the Keck firm nor any 10 transmittal letter nor any receipt of which you are 1 1 aware, is that correct? 1 2 A . Tha t 's correct. 1 3 c . And c an you tell us why no docu m e n t s of 14 that type were prepared? ,, 1 5 A. B ecause these were law firm d o c u m e n t s . 1 6 being returned to the law firm as their documents, I 1 7 saw no need to retain an inventory of what of theirs 1 8 I had had p r e v i o u s l y in my p o ssession. No 1 9 transmittal letter was prep-ared b e c a u s e we i i 2 0 frecuently dealt with the firm on a telepnone basis 2 1 and that was cone in this instance. They knew :o * 22 expect it. 2 3 I did not ask that a receipt be prepared ,, 2 4 since the d o c u m e n t s were being nano carries. r r.e y dnica.Qo, O - h n c i i . (2 72) 722-805? ijr.c. 96 1 k n e w they were coming. T h e r e was no reason to 2 s u g g e s t t h e y w e r e n ' t g o i n g to m a k e it t h e r e and 3 because they were their documents, I didn't need a 4 receipt for them. 5 Q. During the period that you were 6 r e s p o n s i b l e for or c o o r d i n a t i n g the r e s p o n s e s to 7 d i s c o v e r y r e g u e s t s in the p r o p e r t y d a m a g e a s b e s t o s 8 l i t i g a t i o n , were all of the a n s w e r s filed by U n i t e d 9 S t a t e s G y p s u m C o m p a n y f i l e d in g o od f a i t h and in _ 1 0 c o n f o r m i t y w ith the legal j u d g m e n t of the c o u n s e l 1 1 a n s w e r i n g t h e m as t h e y i n t e r p r e t e d the r e q u e s t b e i n g 12 made? 1 3 A . Yes. 1 4 Q. And finally, with r e s p e c t to your 1 5 a f f i d a v i t in res p o n s e to the c o u r t ' s e n c c m p a s s m e n t 1 6 i n t e r r o g a t o r y is t h a t a t r u t h f u l a f f i d a v i t ? ,, 1 7 A . Yes. 1 8 MR. CALE: I have no f u r t h e r q u e s t i o n s . 1 9 EXAMINATION (Resumed.) 2 0 E Y MR. SPEIGHTS: 2 1 0 . M s . To r re y , in r,e r rog atory 77 in the * 2 2 eenville cas a and in the Le x ington case 2 3 a t e d "Did y o ci re ct to be oe rformed, spo n sc r 2 4 nance or re crb*V^ he res ult s of any stuii c Q *** y WM n loirs., cofyotsn arud c^Oteociaisi,(}nc. 0 -meac, L~~ir.cii> (2:2'?e2-?:s~ 97 1 t e s t s p e r f o r m e d by the S a r a n a c L a k e L a b o r a t o r y or 2 the Trudeau Foundation relating to asbestos exposure 3 and its e f f e c t on h u m a n life, and the answer was "None 4 of w h i c h t h i s d e f e n d a n t is c u r r e n t l y a w a r e . " 5 My u n d e r s t a n d i n g is one r e a s o n y o u did not 6 reveal the Brown to Offutt letter and the first 7 pro g r e s s report was based upon Mr. Snell's judgment 8 t h a t t h e y did not h a v e to be p r o d u c e d . Is t h a t 9 cor rect? 1 0 A. As I h a v e s t a t e d i4u- / y e s . i 1 Q. In a d d i t i o n to t h a 4- r U n i t ed S t a t e s G y p s um 1 2 the p o s i t i o n th a t th e y did not have to reveal 1 3 such d o c u m e n t s b e c a u s e t h e y r e f e r r e d to animal 1 4 s t u dies and the i n t e r r o g a t o r y referred to asbestos 1 5 e x p o s u r e and its effect on human life. 1 6 A . That was a p o s i t i o n t a k e n at t he time fha 1 7 answer was d r a f t e d . That was one of the p o s i t i o n s , 1 8 yes. 1 9 Q . Is t h a t one of the p o s i t i o n s U n i t e d S t a t e s 20 G y p s u m to o k in good f a i t h ? 2 1 A . Yes . A 2 2 Q . You would a g ree with me , Ms . Terr e y , rhat 2 3 S a r a n a c was not t e s t ing a n i m a l s t c see *" n Ci ut +- ~ *- c -> 2 4 on a n i m a l s , t h a t is, we w e r e n ' "C u.r y i n g ~ Q S w* w *"*^ U t 'oCf*, and Cfii-O cia tzi, One. dfiicciao, D l t i n o i i 9 (312: 7c2-Sj B 7 9 8 1 rat p o p u l a t i o n of the w o r l d , w ere we? 2 A. 1 don't know, Mr. Speights. I have stated 3 w h a t the p o s i t i o n of the c o m p a n y was in 1983. In 4 the i n t e r v e n i n g years, it has b e e n m a d e c l e a r tha . 5 q u o t e u n q u o t e s e m a n t i c d i f f e r e n c e s w o u l d no longer 6 be tolerated. 7 I b e l i e v e t h a t q u e s t i o n and t h a t a n s w e r in 8 part falls into what has now been termed s e m a n t i c 9 d i f f e r e n c e s . T h e r e is n o t h i n g nu? re I c a n s t a t e on 1 0 the subject. - 1 1 Q. You would agree with me that we were 1 2 t e s t i n g rats to d e t e r m i n e u l t i m a t e l y the e f f e c t s of 1 3 a s b e s t o s on h u m a n s ? 1 4 A. I believe I previously testified that I 1 5 k n e w it was a ra t s t u d y or g u i n e a pigs or some ' 1 6 a n i m a l and t h a 4U- at l e a s t in p a r t , one of the r e a s o n s 1 7 for t h e s t u d y Wc s to d e t e r m i n e if t h e e f f e c t w a s - o n e 1 8 of a c h e m i c a l p r o p e r t y or a p h y s i c a l p r o p e r t y . 1 9 Q. B e c a u s e of our c o n c e r n as to wha t it m i g h t 20 do to human beings? - 2 1 A. T h a t w o u l d ha v e to be the next step. ~ 22 Q . Ms. Tor re y , I t h i n k v o u have t e s t i f i e d 2 3 u p o n 0 X a !u 1 u a - i o n by M r . 2 a 1 e t h a t you p r o v i d e d the 2 4 19 4 8 b u l l e t i n as ear iy as 13 8 3 ? ^V oQ z, c d d o z z n & z x a a n d c ^ d j-z z o c ia tz z ,{ J n a . C L zclco, UCC-.-ioli * (2 72.'72-S2S7 9 9 1 A . Yes. 2 Q. And U.S. G y p s u m in fact took the p o s i t i o n 3 with Judge Wilkins that 1948 was the earliest date 4 d o c u m e n t e d d a t e u pon w h i c h USG had not'.ce of the 5 h e a l t h e f f e c t s of a s b e s t o s ? 6 A. Based upon the information I had available 7 to me and which I recalled at the time, that was the 8 ear l i e s t date we could verify from company sources 9 as I have d e f i n e d c o m p a n y s o urces. _ 1 0 Q. But the 1943 document discusses asbestos? 1 1 A . Y e s , it d o e s . 1 2 Q. The 1943 document also discusses Saranac, 1 3 do e s n ' t it? 1 4 A. I b e l i e v e it d o e s . 1 5 Q. A n d t h e 19 4 8 d o c u m e n t nor t h e 1954 1 6 document discuss Saranac, do they? , 1 7 A. Wel l , the '43 d o c u m e n t t a l k s a b o u t s e n d i n g 1 8 p r e e m o l o y m e n t p h y s i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n to S a r a n a c for 1 9 e v a l u a t i o n . T h a t ' s a d i f f e r e n t aspect, of S a r a n a c 2 0 t h a n the '36 a g r e e m e n t on a n i m a l s t u d i e s . . 2 1 Q. The 1943 d o c u m e n t at least d ocuments thit 22 U.S . G y p s u m -was u s i n g S a r a n a c to r e v i e w its x - r a y s ? 23 A . May I see it? _ ' 2 4 Q . Here it is. . WMi nVo/yk, <cf^OLLn!jE.] CUzA Ckcac '-.tOCJXtZ.i. H n c . 10 0 1 MR. CALE: W h y d o n ' t you read it into the 2 record? 3 BY TEE W I T N E S S : 4 A. The '43 b u l l e t i n c o n t a i n s the s t a t e m e n t , 5 " S u c h a m e d i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n , " w h i c h is r e f e r r i n g to 6 preemployment physicals, "shall include the taking 7 of chest x-rays and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n by Saranac 8 L a b o r a t o r i e s as set f o r t h in b u l l e t i n 4-5," w hich, 9 b u l l e t i n I believe I testified we could not then 1 0 find. F r a n k l y , I d o n ' t k n o w if it's e v e r b e e n found. 1 1 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 1 2 Q. And one of the reasons that you had sent 1 3 or u.S. G y p s u m C o m p a n y would send x - r a y s to Saranac 1 4 was to see if the p e r s o n had a p a s t e x p o s u r e to 1 5 asoestos, correct? 1 6 A . Ihat' s a question? 1 7 Q Yes. 'Wasn't that one of the reasons? ' 1 8 MR . CALE : I don't think that' s a full question. 1 9 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 20 Q . Wasn't he reason at least one of the 2 1 g x - r a y s to S a r a n a c -- strike t*at. 2 2 Wasn't one of the c ir cumstances w m c n 2 3 x - r a y s w o u l d be s e n d to S a r a n a c , a s i t u a t i o n w h e r e .c 2 4 oe r so n wa s hired c r o o t a n r i a l l v would o e n ir e a w i W W a ^ iV o d j'z, <zJX>o i.z n f.'U j a n d czA ~ i.iocL a.h zi-, f j n a . dh.ic.aoo, d i U n c i s 0 (2"" 7c 2 - 8 ~ S 7 10 1 1 a questionable history of exposure to asbestos? 2 MR. CALE: Object to that question. It's a 3 double question. It's the difference between 4 employees and preemployment examinations and I think 5 your question encompassed both. 6 MR. SPEIGHTS: I 'll rephrase it. 7 BY MR. SPEIGHTS: 8 Q. Doesn't that b u l l e t i n require that persons 9 before they are hired who have a previous exposure ' r 1 0 to asbestos have x - r a y s taken and examined by _ 1 1 Saranac? 1 2 A. Let me read the bulletin. I have no 1 3 independent knowledge of the contents of the 1 4 bulletin. It states "It is r e c o m m e n d e d that before 1 5 any a p p l i c a n t for e m p l o y m e n t is hired, the ..i story 1 6 of his pre v i o u s e m p l o y m e n t be fully developed. I^f 1 7 there is a q u e s t i o n a b l e h i s t o r y of exposu.e _o _ 1 8 asbestos or silica dust or an indicated partial lung 1 9 d i s a b i l i t i e s such as T B , the applicant should not be 20 employed until satisfactorily passing a mecical _ 2 1 examination. Sucn a m e c i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n snail -- 22 include the taking of che: a v s an; 2 3 interore Labors tor 24 in bu l l L - 'S & E E L G io ire , r:. a n i c r ^ i i a z i a t L i .,O n e . n rr 10 2 1 Q. And, a g a i n , the 1948 b u l l e t i n and the .1954 t 2 b u l l e t i n do not refer to Saranac? 3 A. It's an en t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t bulletin. 4 Q. I understand that. But the bulletins you 5 did s u p p l y in 1983 and e a r l y 1984 did not refer to 6 Saranac for whatever reason? 7 A. I ' l l t a k e y o u r w o r d for it t h a t t h e y d o n 't 8 r e f e r to S a r a n a c . I d o n 't r e c a l l t h a t t h e y do. 9 Q. I b elieve you stated up on q u e s t i o n i n g by 1 0 Mr. C a l e a n d e a r l i e r u n d e r m y q u e s t i o n s t h a t the,, 1 1 issue at the L e x i n g t o n trial c o n c e r n i n g the 1 2 m e m o r a n d u m of a g r e e m e n t was one of a u t h e n t i c a t i o n ? 1 3 A. I 'm s o r r y . W o u l d y o u j u s t r e s t a t e w h a t 1 4 youjustsaid? " 1 5 MR. SPEIGHTS: R e a d it b a c k , p l e a s e . ' 1 6 (VJHEREUPON, the record was read .. 1 7 by the r e p o r t e r as r e q u e s t e d . ) - 1 8 BY THE WITNESS: 1 9 A . Yes. 20 BY M R . S P E I G H T S ; - 2 1 Q. Did you reveal during the Lexington trial 22 t h a t Mr. Sn e l l had i n t e r v i e w e d M r . S h a v e r as to 2 3 w h e t h e r or not the t was M r . S h a v e r 's s i g n a t u r e ? 2 4 A . I a c _ 1T r c s 1 1 a 5. t h a t W5 5 OH rw c _ at 'atJ i, and ClkicaQO, J?:.:r.c5 e < ^ rfi.io cL a iz.t, fine. -2' 7?2-SCS7 10 3 1 argument. 2 MR. SPEIGHTS: Thank you. That's all I have. 3 Let me ask one thing just as a postsc r i p t . I really 4 d o n ' t want it as par t of the d e p o s i t i o n . Is this 5 one file now that's been furnished on the research 6 the same g e n e r a l f o r m a t as the stack of files? 7 THE W I T N E S S : In g e n e r a l , yes. 8 FURTHER DEPONENT SAITH NOT. - 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 . 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 Q VoLj-z, ezf^ oi.E .n ijs.'ia a n d . U C ~.U *ac, 2 i L n . c u . 6 '312.' 7S2-S05? , O ne. 1 04 1 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) SS: 2 COUNTY OF C KERSHAW ) . c 3 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, COUNTY OF KERSHAW IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 4 KERS H A W COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, ) 5 ) Plaintiff, ) 6 vs. ) ) No.85-CP-28-58 7 ) W.R. GRACE AND CO., ef al . , ) 8 ) - Defendants. ) , 9 1 0 I hereby certify that I have read the ' 1 1 f o r e g o i n g t r a n s c r i p t of my d e p o s i t i o n given at the 1 2 t i m e and p l a c e a f o r e s a i d , c o n s i s t i n g of P a g e s 1 to 1 3 103 inclusive, and I do again subscribe and m a *e 1 4 o a t h t h a t the same is a t r u e , c o r r e c t and c o m p l e t e 1 5 t r a n s c r i p t of my d e p o s i t i o n so giver, as a f o r e s a i d , 1 6 and i n c l u d e s c h a n g e s , if any, so m a d e by me. ,, 1 7 SUZANNE KAY TORREY ' 1 8 1 9 S U B S C R I B E D AND SWORN TO before me this cay 20 of , A .D . 19 8 2 1 Notary Public 22 2 3 2 4 OLfZ, c zffo izn & zx j cm A c^ rf-ttocu iizi. d^iizcxoo, dit m o i t (312) 7c 2-8'j 8'7 jjn c . 1 05 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS : _* 2 COUNTY OF C O O K ) 3 I, S U S A N M. M A R T I N O , a N o t a r y P u b l i c 4 w i t h i n and for the C o u n t y of Cook, State of 5 I l l i n o i s , and a C e r t i f i e d S h o r t h a n d R e p o r t e r of said 6 state, do h ereby certify: 7 Th a t p r e v i o u s to the c o m m e n c e m e n t of the 8 e x a m i n a t i o n of the witness, the w i t ness was duly - 9 sworn to t e s t i f y the whole tru t h c o n c e r n i n g the 1 0 matters herein; ... 1 1 That the foregoing deposition transcript 1 2 was reported st en og r ap h ic a ll y by me, was thereafter 1 3 reduced to t y p e w r i t i n g under my personal c i r e c t i o n 1 4 and c o n s t i t u t e s a true record of the t e s t i m o n y g i v e n 1 5 and the proceedings had; ' 1 6 That the said deposition was taken before 1 7 me at the time and place sp e c i f i e d ; - 1 8 That the reading and signing by the 1 9 w i t n e s s of the d e p o s i t i o n t r a n s c r i p t was a g r e e d u p c n 2 C as s t a t e d h e r e i n ; . 2 1 T h a t I am net a r e l a t i v e or e m p l o y e e o r i 22 a t t o r n e y or c o u n s e l , nor a r e l a t i v e or e m p l o y e e of 23 suer, a 11 o r r.e v or c o u r s e a n v o a 2 4 hereto, nor inneres WM t;o f f - z , Cz s] 'r, . L'iLinoa (212} 72-2CS7 f] n a DEPOSITION DESIGNATION OF ROBERT H. TAYLOR i Deposition Taken in School District of Independence Missouri No. 30 v. United States Gypsum Co., et a l . f N o . CV 84-05334 (Mo. C i r . Ct. July 25, 1986). Page 3 7 17 18 19 20 22 23 26 27 28 29 35 38 57 71 72 76 77 Lines - 15-25 ' 2-14 22-25 1-2, 4 6-8, 13-25 1-12 18-25 1-8 23-5 1-25 1-1, 23-5 1 17-19 21-23 16-22 16-25 1 12-25 1 1 06 1 out c o m e of this action. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I do h ereunto set my 3 ha n d and a f f i x my seal of o f f i c e at C h i c a g o , 4 Illinois, this 0) day of i 5 1 9 86 . 6 7 8 9 My c o m m i s s i o n e x p i r e s F e b r u a r y 7, 1987 1 0 1 1 .S.R. Certificate No. 84-1990 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 20 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 ^WoCft, ~uj a n d c T T - to - ia iii- , O ne .