Document MJRxQ5dr9Bgm3w0Jo04N879VV

FILE NAME: Ztt DATE: DOC#: t DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION>ZZZ' - .c: $;:-~~I-.J'4J:U..~-~ ~-- -------- ----.---- e. EXHIBIT "H" e , - - - - - - - - - - - - . l - - - - - - - - - - - , r - - . - _........___________1......(..P.:..a.:.g..:e.:.s.:c:...1:.:....t::o.-.::--=4-_=_)_~ 1 3 ~) SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA illi FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES EDWARD GUERRA, ~~ } 3) Plaintiff, } ~) ) IN 0 E X WITNESS RICHARD ANDERSON PAGE 7) VS } CASE NO. E?C 365479 ~1 I } BO.NDEX INT!=RNATIONAL, )" ~; INC., et aI., ) )) l}) Defendants EXAMINATION BY MS. DEAN EXAMINATION BY MS. PHIFER FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS. DEAN FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS. PH!FER 21 ORAL VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF RICHARD 'ANDERSON I~ DECEMBER 20, 2007 ~~ .....**..**......tr**....***."***....*.C....**.. ,. ...A ~) I91iP1 ORAL DEPOSITION OF RICHARD ANDERSON, produced as a witness at the inst~nce of the Plaintiff, and duly of sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered cause on the 20th December, 2007, from 10:19 to 2:51, I before Susan S. Klinger, CSR in and for the State of 0) California, reported by stenographic method, at Phifer & ~ ] Colvin, 6029 Beltline Road, Dallas, Texas, pursuant to ~i the proviSIons staled on the record or attached hereto. s~ . - - - - -..----~--~-------------------- . .- ----.------~--- 2 5 177 192 203 4 APPEARANCES EXHIBITS FOR THE PLAINTIFF(S): Ms. Jessica Dean SIMON. E.DOINS & GREENSTONE, LLP 211 E. OCean Boulellard, SUite 200 long Beach, Californl8 90802 6 '.FOR THE WITNESS: Ms, Elizabeth Phlter . ) I . PHIFER & COLVIN PKi) I 6029 Belthne Road. SUite 110 : ) !tV ~ i9)l : <Jh ""\ .- \ 1 1'; I 2p I _\ .JI) Oanas, Texas 75254 FOR THE DEFENDANT(S): 80rg Warner Appeanng telephonically. . Mr Steven Mitchel - BOOTH MITCHEL & STRANGE, lLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard, SUite 4450 los Angeles, California 90017 FOR THE OEFENOANT(S): Ford and General Appeanng telephonically . Ms. Tam Kim Motors Company '4)) FILICE BROWN EASSA 8. McLEOD, I.I.P 1999 Harrison Sireet. 181h Floor .) Oakland, Callfomia 94612 ~ FOR THE DEFENDANT(S}: Bondex International, Inc.. RPM, , Inc, RPM International, Inc. and Dowman Products hI. '~Appearing telephonicallY 'flJ Ii.l Mr. Dan Sigter I \ ;', WALSWORTH, FRANKLIN, BEVINS & McCALL, lLP e'I ,~601 Montgomery Street, 9th Floor No. Page Description 1 6 . Deposition notice 2 18 Borg Warner website pages 3' 29 Response to Interrogatories, Bexar County, 1994 4 101 National Safety News. 1948 5 107 ASME Membership list, 1953 6 107 ASME Membership list, 1940 7 142 Silicosis and Asbestosis article 8 146 Hoeper article I~o 114 ASME article, 1935 114 ASME article, '1933 i11 138 Merewether article, 1930 112 154 Guidance for Preventing Asbestos I I Disease Among Auto Mechanics ,i 13 7 Objections to the depo notice 14 178 First Amended Responses to Plaintiffs Interrogatories I------------------------------~------------------- ) :..., San Francisto, California 94111 {~ PALSO PRESENT, IV i MIke Jackiml8c, videographer i) I i 3p ~ I 15 180 Responses to Interrogatories in the Guerra case It 2 (Pages S to 8) -----------------------------------.----------------------~ 5 7 1) , MS. DEAN: I will stipulate this is take~ by Borg Warner with regard to the deposition notice 2) pursuant to the California Rules of Evidence and issued. 3) Procedure. and that an objection by one defendant is (Exhibit No. 13 marked.) 4 ) good for all defendants that are either present Q. Throughout the deposition: if you want to have a 5) in-person or on the phone. break for any reason, let me know. I almost always take 6) MS. PHIFER; Works for me. a break every hour for no other reason but to go to the 7) VIDEOGRAPHER: Today is December 20th, 2007. restroom, but if you beat me to the punch. lefme know 8) The time is approximately 10:19 a.m. My name is Mike and we can take one, okay? 9) Jackimiec, video speCialist representing E&F Legal A. Okay. 0) Production, Incorporated, Dallas, Texas. This cause Q. Can you let me know what you have done to prepare 1) number is BC 3.65479 entilled Edward Guerra versus Bondex !to talk to me today for this depOSition? 2) International and the deponent is Richard Anderson. We i A. I talked to Elizabeth. We reviewed the 3} are now on 'record at 10:20 a.m. depdsition notice today and we reviewed Lou Mea's 4 ) RICHARD ANDERSON, deposition in this case. 5) having been first duly swom .testified as follows: Q. Okay. Anything else? 6) EXAMINATION A. Yesterday I reviewed some asbestos information 7) BY MS. DEAN: that! had at home just to refresh my memory. I is 8) Q. As I told you when we walked In this morning, my 9) name Jessica Dean. I'm at a law firm called Simon 0) Eddins & Greenstone.. And I represent the plaintlff in reviewed my' personal history trying to make sure I remembered.when I ?Id what and where, and reviewed some Borg Warner history of, their history as a corporation. 1.) this case. and I'm going to be asking you some Q. Anything else? 2) questions, okay? A. That is all. 3) A. Okay. Q. And what did you mean by you reviewed some 4) , Q. And although we are in a conference room for Borg' asbestos history? S) Warner's attorneys, you understand that the oath that A. ! have a couple of studies at home, the I --~--.------ I6' 8 1) you just took has the same importance as if you were in Paustenbach study and the Wong study. 2 ) front of a judge or a jury of your peers? Q. Anything else? 3) A. Yes, I do. . A. No. 1 ) Q. And today. you are in somewhat of a unique 'Q. Now, in terms of the information that you looked j ) si~uation in that we asked ydu to come here in order to at, who gave you that information or where did you get 5) talk to the perso'n most knowledgeable from Borg Warner. it? 7) :. Do you unc;lerstand that? A.. Timothy Bernard from Borg Warner's lawyer. 3): A. Yes. Q. Okay. And both Timothy and Elizabeth are people i j) . . ) I 1) I I,: Q. And that is a roie that you have been in before? A. Yes. Q. And t~ put that in more, I guess, simple terms, that are either lawyers or work for Borg Warner? A. Right. Q. So all the information that you have looked at in ~) the idea is that a company can't be questioned .. Sci we terms of pr~panng for today were prOVided to you by 3) .ask the person that has the most information or lawyers for Borg Warner? 1) knowledge so we can talk to them about the questions A. Yes. . :;) that we have. Is that your understanding? Q. Did you speak with aT'lyone other than attorneys 5) A. Yes. for Borg Warner in preparation? 7) (Exhibit No.1 marked.) A. No. 3) I Q. Okay. And what I've done today is attached as :) I~ Exhibit 1 the notice that we have for this deposition } ) I~ for you as a person most knowledgeable so that we can L) :~~ reference that throughout the deposition in case there 2) '."i-"- are any questions, okay? Q. Okay. MS. PHIFER: let her finish her question before you start your answer. A. Okay. I should say that the personal history 'I that was prepared by me. . 3): A. Okay. . Q. That makes good sense. Now, you mentioned Louis 1} MS. PHIFER: Just for the record, we have R. Merz, that you reviewed his deposition; is that 5) also marked as Exhibit 13 the objections that were filed correct? - - - - - - - - _....__... 73 19 (Pages 73 to 76) '15 1 ) 2) 3 J 4) I' 5) 6) 7) B) 9} 0) i) 2 ) 3) q} 5) 6} 7} B} 9) J) 1) 2) 3) 4J I 5) kind of climate of openness, trust and cooperation? MS. PHIFER: Objection, form. MR. MITCHEL: Objection, it is argumentative. It is vague, ambiguous, it is harassing. A. I don't understand what one issue has to do with the other. The danger to asbestos that was aware and discussed in papers. newspapers and so forth dealt with free asbestos at the mine or free asbestos at the asbestos textile plants; not aSb.estos encapsulated in other materials. 'Q. We wilt talk about the encapsulated issue In a little bit, but you are not aware before 1986 of any literature even in the public press saying that specifically brakes and clutches are dangerous as they relate to asbestos? MR. MITCHEL: Objection, it is v~gue, ambiguous as to the term dangerous. Asks for -- vague and ambiguous as to the term dangerous, it is argumentative. '. A. Repeat the question. Q. And J'will allow the same objections to stand. MR. MITCHEL: Th~nk you. Q. So before 1986 -- actually let me go before 1988, when Borg Warner stopped using asbestos you are not aware of any iflformation just in the public newspapers 7 did Borg Wamer realize asbestos had a potential to cause any type of health problem? A. Asbestos in the free state we became aware of in the '60s. ,Q. Okay. And so it is Borg Warner's claims that before the 1-960s it didn't know that asbestos could be harmful to human health in any way? A. I don't know. ' Q. Okay. So I ~ake from that that they could have known, but you don't know? A. Could be, yes. 'Q. Has. Borg Warner or their lalNYers ever given you any information to suggest that they did, In fact, know prior to the 19605? A. No. Q. f want to be a little bit more specific about the health problems that are associated with asbestos. Can you tell me when Borg Warner realized that exposure to i asbestos could cause a potential problem with asbestosis? MS. PHIFER: I'm going to object to the form of the question as vague as it doesn't specify time or Ii specific products involved, A. Again, in the 1960s we became generalty aware !that there was a health problem associated with 76 1 ) that said that there is C! potential danger specifIcally 2 ) , with brakes and clutches? 3) A. I don't recall reading any. 4) Q. Okay. Do you know for sure one way or' another? 5 ) A.' , have no idea. 6) MR. MITCHEL: Same objection. 7 ) Q. And Borg Warner didn't do anything to figure that 8) out; right. they didn't do any research? 9) MR. MITCHEL: Objection. asked and answered. 0) It's harassing now. 1) A. I have no idea. Z) Q. Outside of what would be in kind of public 3) newspapers, do you know if Borg Warner ever looked in 4) industrial type magazines where they were a member of an. S ) organizatiol) or involved such as organizations for 6) engineers and mechanics in order to learn if the product 7) they were salting was harmful? 8 1 A. I have no idea. 8 9) MS. ~HIFER: Objection, compound, vague. Q: 0) 'ci When did Borg Warner realize asbestos had a 1) !:~potentia! to c, aus.e any health prob.lem? ~ ( r 2 j MR. MITCHEL: I will object to the term 3) i asbestos as vague, ambiguous, overbroad and compound. 4 ) A. Repeat the question, please. 5) Q. Sure, and the same objections can stand. When ----------------- asbestos. . And do you know if one o~ the health problems that were associated with asbestos was asbestosis. the scarring of the luog? A. I'm not sure. Q. Okay. A. I just know it was a health problem as it was discussed in papers, newspapers. Q. 00 you have. you know. extending past the 1960s any time frame where you can say Borg Warner realized that exposure to asbestos could cause'asbestosis? A. Are you talking about asbestos in friction matenal products or asbestos In the raw state at the mine? Q.. In any form. I'm going to get more specific, but right now I want to know what you know by making it the broadest question as I can. MR. MITCHEL: Then object it is overbroad. A. Aware of problems with asbestos in the free state in the mines. or in textile, asbestos textile manufacturing operations. MS.OEAN: 'Object to nonresponsive. Q. I guess what I'm trying to figure out is if. is about the particular health problem that is associated with the exposure. Do you know any time frame when Borg 52 (Pages 205 to 207} 205 207 l), )} I 2 ) " . ~} 3l ) I 7 ) ~l , n! )n:! 3\ ~l I U3) it n ~ll}' ~J fl ~l Q. Okay. With regard to crocidolite, C-r-o-c-i-d-o-I-i-t-e - A. Yes. Q. -- what is the Borg Warner product that you understand contained crocidolite which is the blue fiber, if you knQw? A. I'm not sure. Q. Okay: What is your understanding of the fiber type that was used in manual clutch facings? A. Chrysotile. Q. Thank you, that is alii have, MS. DEAN: Anyone else on the phone? Speak now or forever hold your peace, Then we're off the record. VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of the deposition of Richard Anderson and we are off record at 2:51 p.m. . (Oeposition adjourned at 2:S1p.m.) Case Name: Edward Guerra v. Bondex, et a! Case No.: BC 365479 County: Los Angeles Deponent: RICHARD ANDERSON Reporter: Susan S. Klinger, RMR, CRR. CSR 13084 SIGNATURE I declare. under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California. that I have read my within deposition and the same is true and accurate except for changes and/or corrections, if any, as indicated by me below. Signed in _ _---,-_-:-_ _ __ On the_---,,--_day of,_ _ _ _ _, 2008, RICHARD ANDERSON RICHARD ANDERSON CHANGES ANDIOR CORRECTiONS Page No. Line No, Change and/or Correction 206 1 ) CERTlF(CATE 2} ! I, SUSAN S.I<LlNGER, Certified Shortlland Reporter in 3) and for the State of Califomia. hereby certify 10 the (ollowing: 1 ) 5) That the foregoing d~posihoo of RICHARD ANDERSON was taken before me and completed on December 20,2007. and 6) thereafter transcribed under my direction; that tile , deposition tranScript is a fun, true and accurate 71 translation of the testimony of said witness; indudmg all questions, answers, objections, and exceptions; 8) 9) Thallhe witness. before examination, was by me duly sworn to testify the truth. the whole truth, and nothing 0) but the truth, that the witness reserved signature; 1) That I am 001 a relative, employee, attorney, or 2} counsel of any party to the actiOn or a relative or employee of any such attorney o( counsel, and I am not 3) financially interested in the said action or the outcome thereof; I 4) 5) That I am her"with socuwly sealing the deposition ; transcript of RICHARD ANDERSON and delivering the same 6) : to Elizabeth Phifer and to be forwarded to Jessica Dean, , counsel for plaintiff, for custodial keeping. 7) I 8) 'e,') IN WrrNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto Set my hand and ;~,affixed my offlCiat seal {his'4th of January, :2008. 9) :~ 0) ,.J ", :}-,.lJ SUSAN S. KUNGER, RMR, CRR Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for'the State of California 2) License No.: 13084 Expiratton date: December 31, 2008 3) 4} ~)