Document MGzjr3dYgzoByzXKELYkk8Q7V

1 2 3 Vernon Puppe, deceased, by 4 Wanda Puppe, surviving spouse and Candice Brouse and 5 Deborah Lynn Puppe, surviving children, 6 Plaintiffs. 7 vs. Civil No. A2-86-78 8 A C & S, Inc., a 9 Pennsylvania corporation, et .a1 , 10 D e f e ndan t s. 11 1 2 DEPOSITION OF MICHAEL GREGORY, taken 1 3 pursuant to Notice of Taking Deposition, and 1 4 taken before Jeanne M. Gaughan a Notary Public,in 1 5 and for the County of Hennepin, State of 1 6 Minnesota, on the 28th day of October 1987, at ' f 1 7 4005 West 65th Street, Edina, Minnesota, 1 8 commencing at approximately 9:00 a.m. 19 20 * * * * * 21 22 23 24 25 JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 2 1 APPEARANCES r 2 ROBERT G. GUBBE, P.A., By ROBERT G. 3 GUBBE, ESQ., 218 Cornelia Building, 4005 West 4 65th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55435, appeared on 5 behalf of the plaintiff. 6 7 LETNES, MARSHALL, FIEDLER & CLAPP, LTD., 8 By JAY FIEDLER, ESQ., 202 First Bank Building, 9 P.O. Box 1950, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58206, 10 appeared on behalf of American Hoist and Derrick. 11 1 2 FAEGRE & BENSON, By KIRK O. KOLBO, ESQ., 1 3 2300 Multifoods Tower, Minneapolis, Minnesota 14 55402-3694, appeared on behalf of U.S. Gypsum. 15 16 VOGEL, BRANTNER, KELLY, KNUTSON, WEIR & t 1 7 BYE, LTD,, By LORI J. BECK, ESQ., 502 1st Avenue 1 8 North, Box 1389, Fargo, North Dakota 58107, 19 appeared on behalf of Clark Equipment. 20 2 1 VAALER, GILLIG, WARCUP, WOUTAT, 2IMNEY & 2 2 FOSTER, (Chartered), By ALLEN J. FLAXEN, ESQ., 23 Fifth Floor, Metropolitan Building, 600 Demers 24 Avenue, Grand Forks. North Dakota 58206-1617, 25 appeared on behalf of S.K. Wellman. JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 INDEX WITNESS-__M1chae1 G r egory Examination Mr. Gubbe . Mr. Fiedler Mr. Kolbo Mr. Beck EXHIBITS {No Exhibits Marked.) PAGE 4 17 21 23 PAGE JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 3 I i i 4 1 MICHAEL GREGORY, 2 having been duly sworn, was examined and 3 testified as follows: 4 5 EXAMINATION 6 BY MR. GU3BE: ..7 Q. Would you state your full name and spell your 8 last name, please? 9 A. Michael Gregory. That's G-r-e-g-o-r-y. 1 0 Q. And what is your present home address? 1 1 A. 165 Northland Avenue, Stillwater, Minnesota. 1 2 Q. And how long have you resided there, Mr. Gregory? 1 3 A. Eleven years. 1 4 Q. And are you currently married? 1 5 A. Yes. 1 6 Q. 17 A. And your wife's name? Marsha. A 1 8 Q. And are you currently employed? 19 A . Yes, I am. 20 Q. And who are you employed with? 2 1 A. Barry Blower, Division of Snyder General 2 2 Corporation. 2 3 Q. And how long have you been employed there? 2 4 A. Eight years. 25 Q. In what capacity are you employed at Barry JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 5 1 2 A. 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 Q 7 A. 8 Q 9 A. 10 Q 11 1 2 A. 13 1 4 Q. 1 5 A. 1 6 Q. 17 1 8 A. 1 9 Q. 20 21 A. 2 2 Q. 23 2 4 A. 2 5 Q. Blower? Purchasing manager. And have you been the purchasing manager throughout your period of employment there? Yes . ' And what is your education, Mr. Gregory? I have three years of college. And where is that? University of Minne s o t a. And prior to Barry Blower, where were you emp1oyed ? For a short time at Hansman Industries in Stillwater, Minnesota. And prior to that? American Hoist and Derrick. And how long were you employed at American Hoist i | j and Derrick? Almost ten years. And in what capacity were you employed at f I j i j American Hoist and Derrick? j As a buyer. Did you have employment prior to American Hoist j i and Derrick? j Yes. With G T Sheldoff in Northfield,Minnesota. : What kind of business is that? ! JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 6 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 A. 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 1 1 Q. 12 13 1 4 A. 1 5 Q. 1 6 A. 1 7 Q. 18 19 20 A. 2 1 Q. 22 A. 2 3 Q. 24 25 Basically aerospace manufacturing. And in what position were you employed by them? I was a buyer . As a buyer at American Hoist and Derrick, what were your job duties? , I purchased several different commodities. And which commodities did you purchase? Air brakes, brake linings, tools. There were a number of them. I can't remember all of them right now. With regards to the brake components, were you the only person in charge of purchasing those items? For a period of time, yes. Was that for the -- from 1970 to when? From 1970 to 1977, I think. t And did anyone take your position or take over purchasing of the brake friction products after that? Yes. A man by the name of Bud Koop, K-o-o-p. And is Mr. Koop currently still alive? No . When you were purchasing for American Hoist and Derrick, do you recall if there was any concern expressed to you by anyone in the corporate JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 7 1 2 3 A. 4 Q 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q 14 15 16 17 18 A. 19 Q 20 21 22 A. 23 Q 24 25 ladder as to any problem with air-borne asbestos fibers? As regards to brake lining material? Yes, sir. Towards the end of the time that I purchased the material with the OSHA regulations, we did get letters -- we got some information from the brake lining vendors. And they had started to look at alternatives, some rubber-based friction materials. But this -- as I say, I turned the commodity over then, and I was no longer involved in that type of thing. Okay. When you say you started to get from the manufacturers, do you recall specifically -- or do you recall any of the literature specifically as to the possible health hazards of the air-borne asbestos fibers? I don't recall specific letters or memos, no. Do you recall if there was any effort made at that time to find an alternative to brake linings or clutch linings which contain asbestos fibers? I don't remember exactly what was done. Okay. During the time that you were with American Hoist and Derrick and purchasing the brake components, what companies were you JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 8 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 11 1 2 A. 1 3 Q. 14 15 1 6 A. 17 18 1 9 Q. 20 21 22 23 2 4 A. 25 purchasing from? American Brake Block, Raybestos Manhattan, H. K. Porter and John Mansville. Are there any other companies that you can recall at this time that wouid/ -- that you may have purchased from? No. No. And can you tell me if your purchases from those four companies would have been for both manufacturing departments and service departments at American Hoist? They were for both. Was there any difference in purchasing from -- or purchasing for either the manufacturing division or the service division? Generally service division -- parts that were f ' ordered for the service division were parts that were no longer used in current production. Okay. When you would purchase, would you purchase -- would there be extra purchases made that would exceed just the production for replacement parts or would those be purchased as they were needed? . There were parts that were ordered for stock. There's material that was ordered for service JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 9 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 1 1 A. 12 1 3 Q. 14 1 3 A. 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 2 3 Q. 24 25 stock or there were parts that were ordered per requirement. When you would purchase, was there any type of standard American Hoist purchase requirements or -- that would be given to the manufacturers of the components? What do you mean by requirements? Okay. Were -- okay. Did you have different types of asbestos-containing material that was ordered? There were different brand names or different vendor part numbers that we would order. Did you have specific specifications which these were ordered by? As I said, we would order them generally by vendor part number or if it was a molded brake t block, it would be ordered per an American Hoist drawing showing the configuration, the whole pattern of the block. All right. And this would be something that would be supplied to the vendor. Right. Did you also order -- I!m looking right here at some invoices that were apparently sent to Raybestos Manhattan. And can you just briefly -- JOHNSON & D 21UK COURT REPORTERS 0 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 1 2 Q. 13 14 1 5 A. 16 1 7 Q. 18 19 20 21 2 2 A. 23 24 25 I'm looking at one that's dated -- that appears j to be dated September 26th, 1976. Would you tell j me if that is the standard type of American Hoist ' and Derrick purchaseorder? i ! Basically, yes. | And does that contain your signature? Yes, it does. And on that, what does that indicate it was ordered? It shows that it was ordered as a molded lining per the American Hoist and Derrick drawing. Okay. And if you can help me -- how is that . identified or is that just identified with American Hoist and Derrick's number? The number listed here is an American Hoist and Derrick drawing number. ' Is there any way to identify from that drawing number what particular piece of equipment it would go to? Or would we need to go to that drawing to find out which piece of equipment it would -- You would probably have to look on the drawing. I would have no way of -- just by seeing that number I would have no way of determining what piece of equipment that went onto. JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 11 1 Q. 2 3 Okay. When you were requested to particular parts, how did you get order the information i ! J as to what you were supposed to order? j 4 A. By a purchase requisition. i 5 Q. And would that come from either service or ; 6 7 A. manufacturing? It would come from either one, service or ; I j 8 manufacturing. 9 MR. FIEDLER: Can I just take a look at 1 0 what you are reviewing? 1 1 ( Mr. Fiedler is handed document 1 2 for review.) rl 3 '* ....BgY-_ -^yujM' R"''. G: UBBE: 14 Q. Did you also order fabric linings? 1 5 A. Yes. Woven fabric, yes. 1 6 Q. Can you tell from this purchase order whether ` 1 7 this was ordered as a replacement part or for 1 8 manufacturing? 1 9 A. It shows the delivery point of the material to be 20 the service department. It shows that it's to be 2 1 delivered to Building 5 which was service. 2 2 Q. And what was the code or designation for 2 3 manufacturing? 2 4 A. Manufacturing would have a numbered location, 2 5 generally. I can tell as I remember from the JOHNSON a D21 UK COURT REPORTERS 12 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 9 10 A. 1 1 Q. 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 1 6 A. 11 Q. 1 8 A. 19 20 2 1 Q. 22 23 24 A. 2 5 Q. account number and by the designation of where - there was a numbered designation for the other buildings or the other plant locations. Okay. I have some correspondence here addressed to a Mr. J, period, Reagan, R-e-a-g-a-n. at American Hoist and Derrick. And this is dated April 13th, 1987 from a Robert D. Taylor with Raybestos Manhattan. Can you tell me who Mr. J. Reagan is? He is or was an engineer at American Hoist. Do you know if he is still with American Hoist and Derrick? That I don't know. Did you have any dealings in your purchasing with Mr. Reagan? Yes, I did. Okay. In what regards? I can't be specific. We purchasing people interface with engineering people. It depends upon what the particular situation was. Did you ever have an opportunity to see the products come in which you were ordering for the different divisions? No . Do you have any knowledge as to i f replacement JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 13 1 products were shipped out to various outlets, say 2 a crane service company in Fargo or Moorehead. if 3 they would be shipped in an Am-Hoist container or 4 if they would be shipped in a container supplied 5 with the logo of the manufacturer? 6 A. I really don't know. 7 Q. Who when you were there would have that 8 knowledge ? 9 A. There's only one name that I can remember from 1 0 that area and he may not be the one, but there -is 1 1 a man named Roger Urbanski in service. 1 2 Q. Do you know how that's spelled? 1 3 A. U-r-b-a-n-s-k-i. 1 4 Q. Now, this letter dated April 13th of 1976 1 5 indicates the -- some OSHA requirements relative 16 to the maximum allowable air-borne asbestos ' 1 7 fibers. Did you have knowledge before that time 1 8 , of OSHA requirements? 19 A. I don't remember when I first became aware of 20 OSHA requirements. 2 1 Q. Was this one of your concerns in purchasing? 2 2 A. Not at the time, no. 2 3 Q. Were you ever given any instructions by 2 4 engineering or by -- I assume you had a safety 2 5 director or something with Am-Hoist, did you not? JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 14 1 A. Yes. I think we did. 2 Q. Do you recall the name of that person? 3 A. No . 4 q. Were you ever given any instructions either by 5 anyone in engineering or in safety as to OSHA 6 requirements for your purchasing? 7 A. As it regards brake lining? 8 q. Yes, sir. 9 A. 1 0 q. Not that I can recall. Did you purchase or was there a difference in 1 1 purchasing the woven brake lining material as 12 opposed to the molded brake lining material? 1 3 A. What do you mean by difference? 1 4 q. Was there one particular company that you would 1 5 purchase woven material from as opposed to molded 1 6 material? 1 7 A. Raybestos Manhattan was our major supplier of the 1 8 ,.......woven material. 19 q. And was that for both replacement and 20 manufacturing or service and manufacturing 2 1 divisions? 2 2 A. In reviewing those past purchase orders it looks 2 3 like it was basically for after-market 2 4 replacement. 25 q. And with regards to purchasing of the molded JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 A. 16 17 18 Q . 1 9 A. 20 2 1 Q. 22 2 3 A. 24 2 5 Q. 'I 1 5 ; i i brake blocks and that type of friction bearing - friction material, was there any one particular company that stands outin your mind who you i \ wouldpurchase MR. from? . FIEDLER: Did yousay molded? MR. GUBBE: Right. ! j ; j American Brake Block stands out as the major source that I can remember. Was there any requirement when you purchased from American Brake Block or one of the others when you purchased the molded brake blocks or brake linings? Was there any requirement that any Am-Hoist logo or American Hoist and Derrick name be applied to that brake item? It seems to me we asked, on the molded blocks, to have the American Hoist part number and their ` compound number put on the blocks. Okay. I think there is a statement on one of those purchase orders to that effect. What about the woven material? Do you have any recollection as to that? I don't remember if it -- if he had any requirements like that or not. The woven material it appears was ordered in the JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 16 1 2 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 A. 9 10 1 1 Q. 12 13 1 4 A. 15 16 17 1 8 Q. 19 20 2 1 A. 22 23 Q. 24 25 hundred foot quantities or multiples of a hundred | feet. Does that -- _ do you recall that? I would -- yeah. We ordered it -- that material by the foot. ' So is that something that would then be cut to ji j i ! I l j size either at American Hoist and Derrick or in yourservice department? Well, it would be cut to size at some point in j ; I time. Whether it was at the service department or some other place, I don't know. Do you have any idea who was the purchasing -- or the buyer for these items prior to your tenure at American Hoist and Derrick? I really don't. There was a number of buyers when I started there but I don't remember who turned over the -- who I got the commodity from'' when I started there. When you started there were the people -- the suppliers and manufacturers the same as when you finished there? They were basically the same as when I stopped purchasing that item. I notice in the -- at least in the Raybestos Manhattan documents -- at times they're concerned about, evidently, delivery problems. JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 1 A. Yes. They were not very good when it came to 2 delivery. 3 Q. Did you have that problem with any of the other 4 suppliers? 5 A. Off and on. , 6 Q. John Mansville was not that great and American 7 Brake Block had their bad moments also. 8 MR . GUBBE : I have no further questions 9 time. 1 0 MR . K0LB0: I have -- 1 1 MR . FIEDLER: There -- 12 MR . K0LB0 : _ - a few. Go ahead. 13 1 4 EXAMINATION 1 5 BY MR. FIEDLER: 1 6 Q. There was some questions regarding placement of a 17 logo on American Brake Block items. And you said 1 8 that it was requested that the Am-Hoist part 19 number and their compound be put on the blocks. 20 When you were saying "their compound," who were 2 1 you referring to? 2 2 A. The vendor's compound number. There is a 2 3 statement on one of the purchase orders to that 24 effect under the molded brake line. 2 5 Q. Can you readily find that? You're referring to JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 18 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 1 1 A. 1 2 Q. 13 1 4 A. 15 1 6 Q. 17 18 19 20 2 1 A. 2 2 Q. 2 3 A. 24 2 5 Q. Purchase Order P67060. Yeah. It says -- well, that's all strip material. So plainly show -- okay. That isn't the one I was looking at. And it is to show the manufacturer and the compound or style number. Right. Now, with respect to that particular purchase order, is the manufacturer then Raybestos Manhattan? - That's correct. And what is compound number? What does that mean? That would be the Raybestos Manhattan formulation or formula that -- All right. Referring you to the letter of April 13th, 1976. And before we get to that specifically -- you told us that your tenure at American Hoist and Derrick was from 1970 to 1977 and that towards the end - No. I worked there until 1979. All right. What was 1977? That's when -- as I remember, that is when I stopped purchasing the brake line material. Why was that ? JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 19 ; 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. 3 9 10 1 1 A. 1 2 Q. 13 14 1 5 A. 1 6 Q. 17 18 19 20 A. 2 1 Q. 22 23 24 A. 25 We got a new buyer in the department and the commodities were divided up. The responsibility just shifted -- Ij j Righ t. -- from you to another individual. I j That'sright. Now, did I understand your testimony to be that i i j you did not become aware of any concern with air-borne asbestos until the end of your time at American Hoist? As I remember. Now, when you were saying the end of your time, were you referring to 1979 when you left Am-Hoist or 1977 when you quit buying? 1977 when I quit buying. Now, can you place it any more specifically than / il i ! that? For instance, the letter that was referred ; to you during direct examination carries a date o f Apri1 1 9 7 6 . Uh-huh. j j Using that as a bench mark, can you be any more specific as to when you became aware of any concern regarding air-borne asbestos? I cannot give a specific date on it, no. I know that there was discussion on it about this period JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 11 1 2 A. 1 3 Q. 14 1 5 A. 1 6 Q. 17 1 8 A. 19 20 2 1 Q. 22 23 A. 2 4 Q. 25 of time. When you say this period of time, are you 20 1 j | 'i i j r e f e r ring to-- 1975, 1976 period of time. - And prior to that period of time do you recall j j I I any discussions about it? i No. j Okay. And is it your recollection that the first information you had regarding those concerns were as a result of OSHA regulations and letters from vendors? To the best of my recollection, yes. Do you recall a specific recollection as to what vendors those would have been? Which vendors -- . Provided the correspondence we werejust talking about. * No. I see that thereis a letter from Raybestos I i j J Manhattan here. What other correspondence there was, I don't remember. And that's the letter we talked about dated April 13, 1976? Yes . As far as the mold replacement parts were concerned, was that a situation where essentially JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 1 an Item was ordered either by a part number or 2 according to a drawing; it was fabricated by the > 3 supplier and then sent to American Hoist? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. 6 So in effect the Am-Hoist then was receiving a completed good or a completed item. Completed ' | 7 component would probably be a better term. j 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. That's all I have. 10 1 1 EXAMINATION 1 2 BY MR. KOLBO: .' 1 3 Q. I have just a few questions. You mentioned H. K. 14 Porter as being one of thesuppliers during the j 15 16 17 1 8 A. time you were a buyer. Do you have a recollection as to what kind of products that / were purchasing from H. K. Porter? Not right offhand. They were not a large , you j I] j ! i | iI | 19 supplier of American Hoist. 20 Q. Okay. 2 1 A. Unless I were to see a purchase order that I had 2 2 placed with them -- I could probably identify 2 3 what the item was that I purchased from them 24 but - - 25 Q. Okay. You sort of anticipated what my next JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 22 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 Q. 8 9 1 0 A. 11 12 1 3 Q. 14 15 1 6 A. 17 1 8 Q. 19 20 A. 21 2 2 Q. 23 24 25 question -- can you give me some idea of the suppliers you mentioned, what percentage of products would have been supplied by H. K. Porter? I would say probably less -- less than 20 percent. Okay. Do you associate your purchases from H. K. Porter with any particular period or year between 1970 and 1977? It was during that whole period of time. But as I said, they were not a major vendor of ours. They were just a small source for us. . Okay. Were they a source you would purchase from when you couldn't get somebody else or what would be the circumstance? There were some items that did specify H. K. Porter as the vendor. Do you have any idea whether the H. K. Porter products were asbestos containing? I would assume that they were but I can't say for sure what their compounds were. What was the policy of American Hoist at the time you were there with regard to keeping copies of purchasing orders or invoices? Did you retain them? JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS . 23 1 A. For a period of time. I don't remember exactly 2 what it was, if it was three years or what it 3 was . 4 MR. K0LB0 : I have no further 5 questions. Thank you. 6 7 EXAMINATION 8 BY MS. BECK: 9 Q. Mr. Gregory, my name is Lori Beck and I represent 10 Clark Equipment in this case. Is it true that 1 1 when Am-Hoist ordered replacement parts that were 1 2 fabricated by the supplier and sent to Am-Hoist, 1 3 Am-Hoist had no say in what materials went into 1 4 those parts? They just received the parts that 1 5 were fabricated by the supplier and didn't, you 1 6 know, say, "Put in so much of certain compounds"? 17 A. No. They -- to my recollection they never said, 1 8 you know, put in -- they never gave them a recipe 1 9 for it. 20 Q. Okay. Am I correct in understanding that you 2 1 have no knowledge as to whether these friction 2 2 materials put any dust into the air when they 2 3 were used in cranes, for example? 2 4 A. Never seen the operation or the usage of it. I 2 5 couldn't testify yes or no. JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 24 1 Q. You said 20 percent of the parts you ordered were 2 from H. K. Porter. Do you know the percentage of 3 parts that you got from the other suppliers. 4 MR. K0LB0: I will object to 5 m i scharacterization of testimony. 6 BY MS. BECK: 7 Q. Less than 20 percent. Excuse me. 8 A. I couldn't give a percentage figure, you know, on 9 the other three. 1 0 Q. Now, these documents discussed by Mr. Gubbe, are 1 1 these documents that you've produced? 12 A. No . 1 3 Q. Do you know who produced these? 1 4 A. I have no idea. 1 5 MR. GUBBE: For the record, they're out 1 6 of Raybestos Manhattan's files in New Jersey. 1 7 MS. BECK: Can we have copies of 1 8 these? 1 9 MR. GUBBE: I suspect so. 20 MR. FIEDLER: Just while we're on that 2 1 point -- we can put this on the record for my own 2 2 reco11ection, we will formally be requesting 2 3 production of documents. 2 4 MS. BECK: Okay. I don't have anything 2 5 further. JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 25 1 MR. FLATEN: I have no questions. 2 MR. FIEDLER: No. 3 MR. GUBBE: Mr. Gregory, I guess we 4 have no further questions of you. 5 You have the ..right to read and sign and 6 have notice of the filing of your deposition with 7 the court. However, we would ask you if you a don't mind you can waive the reading and the 9 signing because the court reporter not only is 1 0 very accurate, she has a tape recording and is 1 1 taking everything verbatim. 1 2 THE WITNESS: That's fine. 1 3 MR. GUBBE: Do you say you waive the 1 4 reading and signing? 1 5 THE WITNESS: I waive the reading and 1 6 the signing. t 1 7 (The deposition concluded at 9:32 18 a.m. ) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS 26 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss . 2 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 3 Be it known that I, Jeanne M. Gaughan, 4 took the foregoing deposition of Michael Gregory 5 on the 28th day of November, 1987, at 9:00 a.m. 6 That I was then and there a Notary 7 Public in and for the County of Hennepin, State 8 of Minnesota, and that by virtue thereof, I was 9 duly authorized to administer an oath; 10 That the witness before testifying was 1 1 by me first duly sworn to testify the whole truth 1 2 and nothing but the truth relative to said cause; 1 3 That the testimony of said witness was 1 4 recorded by me and transcribed into typewriting 1 5 under my direction; and that the deposition is a 1 6 true record of the testimony given by the witness 1 7 to the best of my ability; That I am not related 1 8 to any of the parties hereto nor interested in 19 the outcome of this action. 20 WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL THIS 10th day 2 1 of November, 1987. 22 Jeanne M. Gaughan, Notary Public 23 24 25 JOHNSON & DZIUK COURT REPORTERS