Document K2g4KOy47zDY6kprq2nJDx6o

September J, 19^1r< hankers Indemnity Ins.ura.nce. Co., -ewa.-k, lew Jersey. Attention Mr. S. W. Kalbach, Compensation Claim Department Re: I4.-C-Ii.6771 vs. McLaren Auto Suppl; - Accident 9/k/kO Dear Mr. Kalbach: th accordance with your letter of August 2p, I have gone over the file on the case indicated above and am returning it to you herewith. As I interpret the present situation, there is some diffi- culty of arriving at the d agnosis in that the final diag- nosis arrived at at the Ha.hnemann hospital has been dis- countenanced Oj ivii. . ecovery. It still remains to be seen, however, whether is recovery is corn,olet< or what nervous system damage will be revealed by ;ein- hi leer ' s further examination, I shall be very much interes ted in knowing the outcome of Dr. Steinhilber ' s observation, I would not attempt to sugs est a diagnosis in the absence of these necessary data. Quite apart from arriving at a satisfactory diagnosis, it is quite apparent that no evidence has been educed that would justify even suspicion that this man had lead poi soning. The clinical picture of the onset and course of the illness is^typical, indeed, of lead intoxication, and the absence of any evidence of lead exposure is so complete as to make the diagnosis of lead poisoning in this case a very bizarre conclusion. Statements have been made in the documents which have been supplied to the effect that ex posure to leaded gasoline is not sufficient to cause lead poisoning. **0 doubt, attempts could be made by counsel for the plaintiff to indicate that Mr. dHHHKs especially sus ceptible to lead. In this connect ron^xt, is worth -while to know that no cases of lead poisoning have ever been repor ted among the tens of thousands of filling station atten dants and other handlers of leaded gasoline. It is still o* a, n more pertinent and significant to realise that all attempts to find evidence of lead absorption among these men have been consistently unsuccessful. All of the available evi dence tends to show trat there is no occupational lead ex posure associated with the handling of leaded gasoline. There Is no evidence whatever of an opposed type. Ccnse- uently, it would seem that the entire basis for the susicicn of lead intoxication in this case was based on easoning which has clearly been demonstrated to be falla cious. The statements above are probably no news to you, but I have thought it well to make them in order that there may be nothing equivocal in my opinion concerning this case. I should be glad to be of any assistance to you that is possible in connection with this case, but T have numerous engagements during the next several weeks and would appre ciate having information from you as to what I can do fur ther. Much wi;l depend here, I believe, upon the opinion and the nature of the testimony of Dr. Steinhilber. Very t ruly yours. ttobert A. Kehoe, M. D. RAK ef 0016351