Document MoBRXwv9rg500Lpjk88X6J76j
2 PLAINTIFF'S
jf EXHIBIT
i. wq-ck-w
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT <
tn-m
To ths herein; - . .'. .youzm heresy ncUfied to plead to the -enclosed. :i L. c.U.... .withirt -H^eaiy {20) days cl service thereof ^ c a deiajli judgment coy he ' c.;.erod against you.
Attorney for
complete raannec. Defendants shall respond to the*se Interrogatories a
to their relation to the places of employment of employee plaintiff o if deceased the plaintiff's decedent, Dirk Reed
, particularly 1941 1943 - Foote Mineral Co., Cxton, PA; 1943 - Disston s PA; 1943 - Proctor & Schwartz, Phila., PA; 1943 - Sun (SEE ATTACHE puc-c-'tm
Sons, Shin.
Inc., Philo rhoc-o^-
1946 - James Morrissey, Inc., Phila., PA 1947 - 1954 Budd Co., Phila. PA 1948 - Campbell Soup, Camden, NJ 1951 - 1952 Midvale Co., Nicet.own, PA. 1952 - 1976 Vehicle Mechanic, Post Office
That is, defendants shall answer whether they sold to
Sun Ship, Chester, PA
and tne'other places of employ
ment of employee plaintiff or if deceased the plaintiff's decedent,
what products they sold, when they sold it, and how much they sold.
They shall state what labels and instructions were used in
the sale. The plaintiffs demand that answers under oath be filed
and served within thirty (30) days of receipt. These intertogator ie
are continuing in character and require the filing of supplemental
answers if defendant(s) obtain further or different information afte
the initial answer. The term "asbestos product" shall refer to raw asbestos includ
ing chrystolile, amositc, or crecidolite asbestos and to finished
asbestos products.. If you mined end sold only raw asbestos, please
answer all the interrogatories by reference to such products. If
you manufactured and sold finished asbestos containing products,
please answer by reference to said products.
SilEIN (, DROOKMAN, P.A.
ROBERT E. PAUL Attorney for Plaintiff(s)
I PREFATORY NOTE AND GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Answering defendant objects to the definition of "asbestos
i product" as applied to answering defendant as overly broad; answering
; defendant does not manufacture or sell "raw asbestos." Additionally,
many of plaintiff's interrogatories as drafted are directed to
| manufacturers or suppliers of raw asbestos or insulation products; as
1 applied to answering defendant, the interrogatories are unintelligible, i
il vague and confusing.
Answering defendant also generally objects to the interrogatories
,j are overly broad, irrelevant and unduly burdensome. In this regard,
j they seek information beyond plaintiff's decedent's alleged working :i i; history and regarding alleged exposure to persons other than
plaintiff's decedent. Additionally, answering defendant's corporate
records do not indicate sales to the employers listed in plaintiff's
Complaint.
Furthermore, plaintiff's decedent's work history encompasses an
; approximate thirty-year period and it is burdensome and oppressive to
: provide information as to all products manufactured or sold by Chrysler
| Corporation during this period and plaintiff has not provided specific
information as to the dates, types of asbestos-containing products
manufactured or sold by Chrysler Corporation to which plaintiff's
decedent allegedly was exposed, and the makes and models of vehicles he
: allegedly serviced.
In the spirit of discovery, however, Chrysler
i) provides information as to brake linings. 'l j Discovery and investigation is not complete in this lawsuit and
,| Chrysler expressly reserves the right to supplement its responses to
I these interrogatories.
2(a)
UEBERT. SHORT. FITZPATRICK & LAVIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW
9
1. Please identify each person who has supplied information used in answering these interrogatories and specify the interrogatories for which he is responsible. Jack L. Koblin, Senior Staff Counsel, Chrysler Corporation and counsel for answering defendant.
2. Identify each person who was questioned or consulted in order to answer these interrogatories. Unknown. information to answer these interrogatories has been developed over a period of many years by discussions with many people both employed and not employed by Chrysler.
3. Identify each document that was examined, reviewed, and/or used in answering each interrogatory and specify the interrogatory
Answering defendant's responses to these interrogatories represents the compilation of information over time, which in cluded references to numerous documents. It is undulyburdensome andfoppressive to identify each and every document, and such iden tification is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
-3-
I V,
4. Please state whether or not you are a corporation. If so,
state:
(a) Your correct corpqraTC name;
(b) The state of incorporation;
(c) Tfcie date of your incorporation;
(d) the address of your principal place of business;
(e) The addresses of any other places of business;
(f) Whether or not you have ever held a certificate of
authority to do business in this state;
(g) Whether or not you have a registered agent for the
purpose of accepting service in this state, and if so,
the name and present address of that agent;
<h) State your corporate purposes;
(i) State whether or not you have or have had subsidiary
or predecessor corporation(s), and if so;
1. The name of the subsidiary and/or predecessor;
2. Its date(s) of incorporation, if a corporation;
3. Its state(s) of incorporation;
4. Its corporate purposes.
a) Chrysler Corporation.
b) Delaware. c) June 6, 1925. d) 12000 Chrysler Drive, Highland Park, Michigan, 48288. e) various. f) Chrysler Corporation is authorized to conduct business in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
g) Yes, C.T. Corporation System. h) The manufacture and sale of motor vehicles and related
items. i) Chrysler has had many subsidiary corporations since
`.75, none of which would have any relevancy to this litigation.
-4-
i. State whether you have cq$rtrolled, purchased or in any way acquired any interest in any corporation or business entity which has mined, manufactured, produced, processed, compounded, con verted, sold, merchandised, supplied, distributed, and/or other wise placed in the stream of commerce, raw asbestos or finished asbestos products and if so, state: No.
(a) The name and address of said corporation or business entity;
(b) The date(s) you controlled, purchased or acquired any interest;
(c) ?*he manner of acquisition, including percentage of ownership;
(d) Identify all documents with respect to the above;
6. State whether you have at any time directly or indirectly been engaged in the mining, manufacturing, producing, processing, compounding', converting, selling, merchandising, supplying, distributing, and/or otherwise placing, in the stream, of commerce of raw asbestos or finished asbestos products, if so, be specific in*your answer and-state as to each such asbestos product:
(a) The trade name, general name and/or other identification of each asbestos product, raw or finished;
(bj The dates during which you mined, manufactured, supplied, distributed, and/or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce each such asbestos product;
(c) The intended use of each such asbestos product; (d) Furnish a complete description of each such asbestos
product including the type of asbestos contained therein and the percentage of asbestos contained in said product; (e) Describe the physical appearance including color of each such product specifying whether the said product was/is sold in a solid, loose, powdered or other form; (f) Identify the location of each plant or facility which produces each of the aforesaid asbestos products;
See attached sheet.
6. As noted in Chrysler's Answer to plaintiff's Complaint Chrysler has not been engaged in the mining, manufacturing, producing, selling, merchandising, supplying or distributing of raw asbestos. As to brake linings, answering defendant provides the following responses:
a) Cycleweld Cyclebond or Mopar. b) In 1959, answering defendant commenced production of brake linings. c) To line brakes. d) The chemical- composition of the product is proprietary, although defendant's brake linings contain chrysotile, 50% by weight. e) The lining would be slate gray or tan and in solid form.
Trenton, Michigan.
7. Do asbestos products that you mine, manufacture, produce, process, compound, convert, so*fl, merchandise, supply, distribute and/or otherwise place in the stream of commerce require any further change or modification before being put to their ultimate use by the user? For example, is there any mixing oc cutting that has to be done: If there are any changes or modifications what soever, state the specific nature of the change or modification.
Chrysler uses raw asbestos to make brake linings.
>. State whether you presently mine, manufacture, produce, p:ocess, compound, convert, sell merchandise, supply, distribute, and/or otherwise place in the stream of commerce the product(s) previously listed in interrogatory 6.
Answering defendant presently manufactures and sells brake linings.
/
-6-
9. Identify all distributors of your asbestos products and state: (a) The date(s) your produces) were sold or delivered to said
distributor;
.
(b) The quantity or typo of product(s) sold or delivered to
said distributor;
(c) Identify and produce all documents relating .to said
distributor;
(d) Whether any agreement concerning third party liability
existed between you and the distributors; and if so, if
such agreement was in writing, attach a copy of such
agreement; if such agreement was oral, then set
forth fully the terms and the identity of the persons
making such oral agreement.
9. Answering defendant sells new vehicles and replacement parts
to its dealers. Thus, answering defendant has no "distributors" as
such. In this context, interrogatory number 9 also is overly broad,
unduly burdensome and oppressive in that it seeks information as to
each and every sale of its asbestos-containing products. In this
regrd, to respond to the interrogatory would require a search of
voluminous records which would consume many man-hours, which would be
burdensome and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence. Furthermore, the interrogatory seeks irrelevant information
in that the interrogatory is not limited to the employers of plaintiff
or his dates of employment.
10. Were any patents or trademarks ever applied for or granted with regard to any product(s) listed in interrogatory 6? If so, for each such product state: (a) The number of each patent;
. . (b) The date(s) issued and to whom issued; (q) ""he name of each patent application that is presently pending. \
10. (a),(b). None are patented,
(c). Not applicable.
Af
11. Identify each business entity from whom you have received
raw asbestos if you are not a miner or distributor of mineral or
raw asbestos during the period
plaintiff's or decedent's employ,
including:
see attached.
(a) name of and address of supplier; (b) the date(s); (c) amount; (d) types received;
(e) identify and produce all documents relating to such purchase;
12. Identify each business entity from whom you have received finished asbestos products if you are not a miner or a distributor of mined asbestos indicating;
(a) name and address of said entity; (b) the date(s); (c) amount(s); (d) types received; (e) identify and produce all documents relating thereto;
See attached.
13. Did you sell raw asbestos or finished asbestos products to the employers of employee plaintiff or if deceased, tne piaintirt decedent; or did you install or report asbestos pipecovering.
See attached.
t
\
during or immediately prior to the periods of employment of
If yes, identify
(a) dates of sales; (b) amounts of sales; (c) names of finished asbestos GODtaining products sold; (d) amount of raw asbestos sold;
Invoice records can be attached to answer this interrogatory.
i
11 (a). Asbestos Corporation Ltd.; Carley Canadian, Inc.; Johns-Mansville.
(b). Various times since 1959. (c). Interrogatory 11(c) is unduly burdensome, oppressive and is not reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Additionally, the amount of asbestos supplied is irrelevant to the subject controversy. (d) Chrysotile. (e) Interrogatory 11(e) is objectionable on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome, overbroad and oppressive. Additionally, the identification and production of all documents relating to purchases of asbestos by answering defendant is information irrelevant to the subject controversy and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
12(a),(b). As noted in response to interrogatory 6,
answering defendant commenced production of brake linings in 1959.
Apart from Chrysler, brake lining vendors for the years 1958-1981
were:
1981
Bendix Corp. - Friction Materials Div
1980
Same as 1981
1979
Same as 1981
1978
Abex Corp.
Bendix Corp.
1977
Same as 1981
1976
Same as 1981
1975
Same as 1981
1974
Bendix Corp.
Raybestos-Manhattan
1973
Same as 1981
1972
Same as 1981
1971
Same as 1981
1970
Same as 1981
1969
Same as 1978
1968
Abex Corp.
Bendix Corp.
Johns-Manville Corp.
LIEBERT. SHORT. FITZPATRICK & LAVIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW
\
1967
Same as 1968
1966
Same as 1968
1965
Same as 1968
1 1964
Same as 1981
| 1963
Same as 1981
1962
Bendix Corp.
Johns-Manville Corp.
! 1961 Same as 1968
1960
Same as 1968
I
jl 1959
Abex Corp.
jj Johns-Manville Corp.
ji 1958
Abex Corp.
;l Johns-Manville Corp.
jj (c) Information as to "amounts" is irrelevant to the subject
i1 matter of this lawsuit, not likely to lead to the discovery of
admissible evidence, burdensome and oppressive.
(d) This interrogatory is vague and confusing and applied to
answering defendant as the "type" of product is brake linings.
(e) Interrogatory 12(e) is objectionable in that the
identification and production of all documents regarding brake lining
purchases is burdensome, opressive, irrelevant, and not calculated to
j; lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
13. As noted in response to previous interrogatories, answering
i defendant does not sell raw asbestos. Available corporate records do
'! not indicate that it sold brake linings to the plaintiff's decedent's
;i
employer. This interrogatory is irrelevant to answering defendant to
the extent it seeks information as to the installation or report (sic)
of asbestos pipecovering in that Chrysler does not manufacture or sell
pipecovering. !l ;l II
a
8(b)
LIEBERT. SHORT. FITZPATRICK & LAVIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW
14. If you have no records of sales earlier than a date
identified in your answer -to number 13 supra, will you admit that
you sold asbestos products to the companies involved during or
immediately prior to the employ of
Birk Reed
by said companies?
No. See response to preceding interrogatory.
15. Did you sell asbestos products to distributors who . would resell your asbestos products to the employers identified in number 13 supra, or ship asbestos products to such employers through sales to such distributors? If so, name the distributors, identifying
(a) name, address of distributors;
I (b) asbestos products sold to distributors;
(c) raw asbestos sold to distributors; (d) amounts sold; (e) dates of sale;
15. As noted in response to previous interrogatories, answering defendant does not sell its products to "distributors." Consequently, this interrogatory, as drafted, is inapplicable to Chrysler.
-9-
16. Did you, at any time, asj^ign or license any of your asbestos products to any person, firm or corporation? If so, state:
(a) Identify the assignors or licensee; (b) The purpose of such assignment or license; (c) The name(s) of the produce(s) so assigned or licensed; (d) The time period of the assignment(s) or license; (e) Identify and produce all documents relating to such
assignment or license; This interrogatory is ambiguous and unintelligible in the use of the words "assign or license any of your asbestos products." As noted above, Chrysler sells new vehicles which contain brake linings and sells replacement linings to its authorized dealers.
17. Did you rebrand any of your asbestos products for other companies? If so,
(a) Identify such companies; (b) Indicate the specific products rebranded for each
company; (cj The dates of each such rebranding; That is, did you manufacture or acquire asbestos products and affix the names of other companies to the product or its containers?
t
No.
17. Since the initial c >z<i of said mining, rr.anu'r.cturi-.-.g. procucinr processing, compounding, converting, selling, rirchcndising, supplying, distribution.ari8/or otherwise placing in the stream of commerce your asbestos products as specified in the answjr
\ to number 6, advise whether or not there have been any alter ations or changes, then as to said alterations.or changes, state: (a) the trade name(s) of each such product(s); (b) The date(s) each such product(s) was altered or changed; (c) The specific nature and date(s) of each such alteration or change of composition. (d) The reason for each alteration or change of composition;
Formulations are developed for each brake design for each car or truck line. No change is permitted to the formulation after production is approved.
18. Describe in detail the packages in which you would, distribute or deliver asbestos products to the wholesaler or retailer for
'-i resale to companies such as Plaintiff's employers, stating:
(a) The type of box or package used;
(1>) The date each type of box or package was used.;
c) A physical description thereof, including the size and ' color of the box or package;
(d) A description of size and color of any printed material that appeared on or in said box or package stating;
1. A verbatim statement of any warnings or cautions; 2. The date(s) each such warning or caution was first
used and last used. (e) Identify and produce a copy.of said warning or caution.
18. Interrogatory 10 is inapplicable to answerincr defendant because it does not sell its products to "wholesalers or retailers for resale to companies such as plaintiffs employer," but rather sells nev; vehicles which contain brake linings and sells replacement lininos to its authorized dealers.
-11-
19. Prior to releasing the Asbestos product(s) listed in interrogatory 6 for sale, were any tests conducted on same to determine potential health hazards involved in the use, handling or exposure of the materials contained therein: If so. state: (a) The identity of each individual or firm who conducted such tests; (b) The date, purpose and result of each such test; (c) Identify and produce all documents relating to such tests;
See attached sheet.
20. Did you make any changes in your asbestos products as a result of such test: If so. state: (a) The product changes;
i (b) The nature of the change made;
(c) The purposes of the change; (d) The date of such change;
(e) The identity of each person or firm responsible for making the change.
Not Applicable.
-1 >_
19. Interrogatory 19 improperly assumes that there are potential health hazards involved in the use, handling or exposure to the products of answering defendant. Furthermore, the interrogatory is vague and confusing because the terms "use, handling and exposure" are not defined as they relate to the instant lawsuit. Consequently, answering defendant will respond, without waiving the foregoing objections, and with regard to the "use" of products at issue in this litigation as Chrysler understands plaintiff's allegations, that is, installing, repairing or replacing.
Based on available corporate records, answering defendant has not done direct testing of alleged health hazards.
12(a)
21. Has any written material of any kind been prepared by you indicating how your product(s) should be used, applied or handled by the workers .who would be reasonably expected to use your asbestos products? If so, please stat.e:
.
(a) Identify each person or firm who prepared same; (b) Identify each person or firm who presently has
possession of same; (c) The date(s) and manner in which said material was
distributed to purchasers or users of your product(s); (d) Identify and produce all applicable documents.
Answering defendant's service manuals contain information as to the installation of defendant's products.
22. If there have been any changes in any labels, inserts or other information which has ever accompanied any of your products as it was placed on the market, state the reasons therefore and the name and address of the person who recommend or ordered the change.
Not applicable.
t 23. 'State the names, titles and addresses of defendant's advertisi
agents who are employed or used in connection with the promoti of the product(s) specified in answer to interrogatory 6, and give a summary of all the . instructions given to such agents regarding the uses, safety, and health related effects of the use of the products and their obligations to provide this information to customers.
Answering defendant does not advertise brake linings.
-13-
2-1. Have you at any time published and/or distributed any document containing any warnings concerning the possibility of illness, disease, or injury resulting from the use of or exposure to the asbestos products listed in answer to interrogatory 6. If so, please state:
(a) The wording of each such warning; (b) A description of.each such document; (c) The method used to distribute the warnings to persons who
are likely to use, handle or be exposed to your product(s); (d) The date(s) such warning was issued; (e) Identify each person who presently has possession of the
above-described documents; (f) Identify and produce all the documents mentioned in parts
(a) through (e) of this question; (g) In particular, was any warning ever given, either in writing
or in any other way concerning the possibility of the ill ness as known as cancer resulting from the use of or exposure to any of the asbestos products listed in answer to inter rogatory 6. (h) How the document and the information involved were communicated to purchasers of the product?
24. Plaintiff alleges and this interrogatory assumes or imolies that some unspecified warning was necessary with regard to answering defendant's products, which Chrysler Corporation denies and no admission is made or intended by responding to this and other interrogatories as drafted. Nevertheless, this interrogatory also is objectionable because it is not confined to the time period at issue, that is, plaintiff's decedent's period of employment as alleged by plaintiff, 1941 through 1976. In response to these allegations, Chrysler states that no warning was necessary; use of defendant's products will not e::pose a person to inhalable, intact, chrysotile fibers of lengths considered to be pathogenic or in amounts which would cause disease.
25. Have you ever given any warnings to your employees of dangers of illness and/or disease by reason of their use, handling or exposure to asbestos products: If so, state: (a) The date of each such warning; (b) How such warnings were given; (c) If such warnings were oral, state the names and addresses of the person(s) giving and receiving such warnings; (d) If such warnings were written, state; 1. The date(s) of such.warning(s); 2. The present location of such warning(c); 3. The names and addresses of individuals who prepared such warning(s); 4. Where and/or how such warning(s) were posted, 5. The reasons for such warning(s). (e) Whether or not in the course of such warnings, there was any warning concerning the possibility of contracting the disease known as cancer resulting from the use of or exposure to the asbestos, products. in particular, whether there was any warning concerning that type of cancer known as mesothelioma.
Interrogatory number 25 seeks information that is irrelevant to the subject controversy. Plaintiff does not allege her decedent, Birk Reed was an employee of Chrysler and hence information as to Chrysler's own employees is not at issue in this lawsuit and the information sought is not reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
I
^6. Were you ever advised by any member of the medical I profession or other profession6uch as industrial hygienists occupational hazard professionals or other persons to utilize
hazard labels on your products and to give clear and explicit
jj warnings concerning the possibility of cancer, and/or mesothelioma
!| and/or other serious illnesses and diseases including but not limited .< to asbestos to those who might use, handle, or be exposed to your j! asbestos products after they have left your control? Identify
ii this individual or individuals or company set forth the date of
|j this advise, and attach copies of this advise if written.
No.
i
i
27. When, if at all, did you first become aware that airborne
i dust containing some asbestos fibers might be created in the course
! of the use of your asbestos products by workers in:
:i
i (a) the pipe insulating trade;
ii
lb) textile factories;
(c) companies manufacturing asbestos products; (d) other industries such as but not limited to
* 1} railroads (2) oil burner service
This interrogatory is inapplicable to answering defendant, Chrysler Corporation inasmuch as it does not manufacture or sell :he types of products described in sub-paragraph (a) through (d).
i
2G. When did you first become aware that airborne dust containing asbestos fibers or fiDriles would be created in use or removal of your asbestos products by an insulation worker or other workers could cause asbestosis, pleural thicaning or pleural*placque, mesothelioma, or lung cancer? Pleaise identify the date of this knowledge by product whether raw asbestos or a finished product and the date of knowledge that each of the diseases set out could develop from exposure to asbestos.
See attached sheet.
29. If your answer to question 28 is in the affirmative, please explain whether the Threshold Limit Value is based on counts of all particles in the air or just the asbestos fibers in the air.
See response to preceding interrogatory.
(I
V
j 28. Interrogatory 28 improperly assumes that airborne dust
| that contains asbestos fibers or fibriles is created by use of or
i removal of defendant's asbestos products that could cause various | diseases. This statement represents plaintiff's allegations in
.] this lawsuit, which answering defendant denies.
tj
Consequently,
,j answering defendant cannot respond to interrogatory 28 in its
ij present form.
Additionally, the interrogatory is a question
iili
j! designed to elicit a response that may be used in a misleading
;! manner at time of trial rather than the discovery of factual :! Ij information. Answering defendant does not respond to interrogatory
28 with regard to insulation workers inasmuch as Chrysler does not
manufacture or sell asbestos-containing insulation products.
:M!ti
I
17(a)
LIEBERT. SHORT. FITZPATRICK & UAVIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I ,;0. Vihen did defendant know that any governmental or private agency, or other entity, issucf/' guidol inos suggesting Threshold Limit Values for exposure to asbestos dust? If ever': (a) Identify the agency or entity issuing the guideline; (b) State the content of the guideline(s) verbatim; (c) State the date issued and the date you first knew the purpose of the guideline(s).
No records exist from which to answer this question. Chrysler is aware, that following the enactment of OSHA, threshold limit value guidelines were adopted.
,l 31. Does the defendant contend that the asbestos products mined, ! manufactured, produced, processed, compounded, converted, sold, | merchandised, supplied, distributed and/or otherwise placed in
ij the stream of commerce by the defendant are not "hazardous sub-
ii stances", as-defined in 15 U.S. Code, S1261 (5)? Said definition
V. Ij is incorporated herein by reference, and defendant is required
! to reply as to all the parts of said definition. If so, state i the facts, opinions or conclusions upon which defendant relies
to support such contention, and identify each document which is I applicable.
i Answering defendant cannot respond to interrogatory 31 because there is no subsection (5) in 1261 of title 15 of the inited States Code. I
I
i
-10-
3 2.: Have your asbestos products at any time been ubjected to
V
(a) Tests or studies toy a govei nir.ental agency; (b) Test or studies by any independent organization; (c) Tests conducted on humans or animals on your be
half or on behalf of any co-defendant in this action. If your answer to any of the subsections (a) through (d) is in the affirmative, for each test or study state: 1. The date it began; 2. (The date it ended; 3. The procedure of the test or study; 4. The number of man hours spent on it; 5. The place where it was conducted. Not Applicable.
f
\
i
k -10-
t
33. Have you, at any time, been a member of any "trade association V. or association" composed of other miners, manufacturers, suppliers,
distributors, producers, processors, compounders, converters, sellers, merchandisers, and/or anyone otherwise placing in the stream of commerce asbestos products? ' If so, state:
(a) Identify each such association or organization; (b) The dates during which you were a member? (c) The names of any publication published by or
written by such association or organization; (d) The dates and addresses of all other members; (e) What meetings you attended and identify who attended; () Who spoke at such meetings; (g) Were transcripts or summaries or minutes or notes
made of such meetings? If so, identify the above, tell specifically what was made and give the name, title and address of the person or persons who have custody of the transcripts and/or summaries and or minutes and/or notes mentioned above and state when and where counsel for the plaintiff may examine and copy these documents.
To answer this question would require making inquiry of every Chrysler Corporation employee, past or present, which would be impossible. Defendant's Industrial Hygiene Department currently belongs to the American Industrial Hygiene Association, the American Academy of Industrial Hygiene, Industrial Health Foundation and the National Safety Counsel.
-20-
Have you, at any ti::.e, boe:. a member of and/or contributed to tflc Industrial Hygiene Founeat j,on: If so, state:
(a) The dates you were a member and/or contributed; (b) The identifications of any publication of any such
organization; (c) What meetings you attended and who attended;' (d) Who spoke at such meetings; (e) Where transcripts or summaries or minutes or notes
made of such meetings? If so, identify the above, tell specifically what was made and give the name, title and address of the person or persons who have custody of the- transcripts and/or summaries and or minutes and/or notes mentioned above and state when and where counsel for the plaintiff may examine and copy these documents.
As noted in response to the preceding interrogatory, answering defendant's Industrial Hygiene Department currently belongs to the Industrial Health Foundation. Additionally, answering defendant does not have records of the information requested in subparts (a)-(e)."
< \
-21-
35. State whether you have received any workmen's compensation claim for injury, occupational^ isease, or death, to any of your
employees or to any person^ working as independent contractor for you, or under your direction or to any persons in "contract units" operated by you or your subsidiaries or divisions or to any persons hired on an occasional basis by your agents, employees or directors, in the course of work activity performed by the aformc .tioned "contract unit" for the following diseases: asbestosis, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, pulomor.ary fibrosis dyspnea, carcinoma of the lungs, or mesothelioma. In answering this question confine your answer to workers who were occupationally exposed to asbestos products by their using, handling, fabricating, installing, removing, mixing, cutting, packing or transporting products containing any percentage whatsoever of asbestos whether raw or finished and whether made by you or made by some other company but used,. handled, modified, installed, removed, mixed, cut, packed or transported by the person
or persons making the workmen's compensation claim for injury or occupational disease or death whether your employees or contract unit managers or contract unit occasional workers independently contracted for .If there have been any workman's compensation claims within the above-described criteria between the years 1930 and 1978, state:
(a) The date you received notice of the claim;
(b) The identity of the person making the claim; or on whose
behalf the claim was made;
(c) The specific disease or illness complained of. In
particular, all complaints of: asbestosis, emphysema,
chronic bronchitis, pulmonary firosis, dyspnea,
carcinoma of the lungs and mesothelioma;
(d) The name of any physician oc nurse who made any notes
on the claim or who inscribed any words whatsoever
on any document, paper, letter, book, or record per
taining to the evaluation of the facts and/or the
merits and/or the medical workup of the claim filed;
(e) A brief summary of the substance of the written
materials mentioned in section (d) ;
(f) The present location(s) of the documents, medical or
otherwise, relevant to the claim files, if any, specified
in section (a) ;
(g) An index to the claim files, if any specified in
sectiorfa) showing how, if at all, they are broken
down by the defendant in the ordinary course of the
defendant's business activity (i.e. by geographical
region, by plant ,by profit center, by disease, by
injury, by level of compensation demanded, by estimate
on the eventual payments that will be required on the
claim, by worker's name or number, by contract unit,
by date, or in any other way that the defendant as a
practical matter- in the ordinary course of defendant's
business actually breaks down and indexes the claims of
the kind specified for purposes of defendant's own
internal filing and record keeping.
(h) The state or federal agency or agencies which would in
the ordinary course of defendant's business and in the
ordinary course of the state and federal government's
hll e i n r> o <- ~ -
--'
(i) The indexing or filing system used by those agencies in \ the respective states^oc in the respective federal agencies,
ij) The records retention policies concerning claims of the kinds specified in Partial of the defendant, and of any state agencies of which the"defendant has knowledge in states where the defendant does business, and to which the defendant supplies information concerning claims of this .kind. Also include any federal agencies which would receive notice directly or in the defendant's knowledge indirectly as a matter of the ordinary business of the federal government cgncerning claims of the aforementioned kind;
(k) The disposition of said claim(s} including benefits paid or settlements reached or moneys voluntarily paid by your insurers, if any;
(l) The last known address of the attorney representing the Claimant, if any.
Unknown; claims are retained by the name of a claimant and not cause of claim.
\
. -23-
36. Have you ev^r been n.mcd as a party in any action for work men's compensation benefits fo^ injury, occupational disease, or death by any of yoi/r employees or their estates, or by any persons working as independent contractors for you or under your direction or their estates, or by any directors, managers, or persons involved on a casual labor or occasional worker in dependently contracted for basis in "contract units" operated by yo or their estates where the disease, injury or death was asserted by the Plaintiff and/or claimant in the action to be based in whole or in part on the diseases; asbestosis, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, pulmonary fibrosis, dyspnea, carcinoma of the lungs, or mesothelioma and where the plaintiff and/or claimant in the course of his work experience used, handled, fabricated, installed, removed, nixed, cut, packed or transported asbestos products con taining any percentage whatsoever of asbestos? If so, state as to each claim:
(a) The identity of the Plaintiff and/or claimant and the disease(s) or injury(s) on which the action was premissed;
(b) The date is was filed; (c) The name and address of the court, agency, or
administrative body, in which it was filed; (d) The term and/or number of the action; (e) The identity of the claimant's attorney; (f) the identity of the claimant's physician; (g) The identity of your physician, and/or expert
witnesses; (h) The disposition of the action including any moneys
paid voluntarily or by agreement or in settlement by you or by our insurance carrier.
i<
As noted in response to the preceding interrogatory, claims are retained by the nane of the claimant, not the cause of claim.
37. If you or your insurance carrier have ever paid out money
voluntarily/ or by agreement,
in settlement on a claim for
the following diseases; asbestosis, emphysema, chronic bronchitis,
pulmonary^fibrosis, dyspnea, carcinoma of the lungs, or mesothelioma
between tfte years 1930 and 1978, specify for each instance:
(a) The amount paid out; (b) Who paid it; (c) Who received the payment; (d) The date of the payment(s); (e) Whether, if it was an agreement, the agreement went
on file with any court, agency, or administrative body, and if so, the date and location of the filing; (f) The current location of any document(s) evidencing such voluntary payment, and the name, and address of their present custodian, and the time and place where counsel for plaintiff may examine and copy such document(s) .
Not for any third-party claims. No such information is available for workers' compensation claims.
<
38. If you or your insurance carrier have ever paid out money,
voluntarily, or by agreement, or in settlement to any employee
contractor, contract unit worker, contract unit manager, or
casual, or incidental laborer for a claim based on the following
diseases; asbestosis, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, pulmonary
fibrosis, dyspnea, carcinoma of the lungs, or mesothelioma, state as to each'recipent of such funds:
(a) His or her identitiy;
(b) The identity of his or her attorney; (c) The date the clain was made;
(d) The date payment commenced arid the duration and
anount(s) of payment(s);
(e) The insurance carrier making the payment;
(f) Whether such agreement was filed in any court; agency
or administrative body, if so, state:
a. The date it was filed;
- b. The location of such filing;
(g) The currr
location of any document (s) evidencing such
voluntary prsy;--t_.-rt (U.e name and address of their present custcJi;.!. ar:d the time and place where counsel for the/plaintiff can examine and copy such document(s). '
Answering defendant incorporates by reference its answer to the preceding interrogatory as if fully set forth at length herein. Furthermore, plaintiff's decedent is not alleged to have been an employee of Chrysler Corporation and hence this interrogatory also is irrelevant in this sense and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
3SI State whether you or your insurance carrier has voluntarily or by agreement paid to any employee benefits for accident, sickness, health, disability, or retirement, by reason of exposure to asbestos products. If so, state as to each:
(a)
(b)
(c) t ' <d)
The identity of such employee;
The identity of the employee's
The identity of-, the insurance payment? The dates the claims were made
attorney; carrier (s)
as to each
making such separate
claim by each employee; (e) The date payment was made; (f) The current location of any documents evidencing such
payments, the name and address of their present custodian and the time and place where counsel for the plaintiff can examine and copy such documents.
See response to the preceding interrogatory.
Y---------
V f4o0r. wSotrakmteent'hseconammpeesnsaantdionadadnreds.soecscuopfataiolnl avl oduriseina?^nran carrlers
from 1930 through 1978, and aS^to each insurant
compensation
the period| when such coverage was provided and the'amo^t^prlvided
As noted in response to interrogatory 38, plaintiff's decedent is not alleged to have been an employee of Chrysler. Hence, information as to insurance carriers for workmen*s compensation and occupational disease compensation is irrelevant to the subject controversy and the interrogatory seeks information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
41 . If you or your insurance carrier have ever paid out money as a result of a court decree or jury verdict against you in a case in which the plaintiff asserted injury resulting from exposure to asbestos products mixed, manufactured, produced, processed, compound converted, sold, merchandised, supplied, or placed in the stream of commerce identify the:
(a) Court in which judgement was entered against you. (b) Court docket number. (c) Plaintiff's name. (d) Plaintiff's attorney's name and address (e) Amount of judgement. (f) Date judgement entered. (g) Other defendants against whom judgement -was entered.
i/
No third-party lawsuits have resulted in any court decrees, verdicts or judgments against Chrysler Corporation.
-27-
r.
-\7. Do you have a medical department that performs occupational studies or reviews of worker's^health? If so, describe: V (a) How long in existence.
(b) .Names of those who have led that department since' 1930.
(c) Any reports or warnings provided to you by that depart ment as to the effects of asbestos.
(d) Current address of that person or those persons referred to in (b) Supra.
Chrysler has a Medical Department which engages in the practice of industrial medicine. It does not perform occupational studies as such and what is meant by "reviews of workers' health" is unclear.
43. Have you had a medical advisor or other professional reviewing your products particularly asbestos, and making recommendations for use? If so, please answer (a)-(d) of interrogatory 43.
Interrogatory 43 is vague and ambiguous in that it does not set forth the type or nature of the "review" of answering defendant's asbestos-containing products. Without waiving this objection, the answer to this interrogatory is: no.
-2C-
>' -I 44. If you are merely a. d ijetr i butor, rather than a manufacturer
and distributor of asbestos products, please answer interrogatories 7,18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, with respect to whether you ever received such information from the manufacturers- or from the trade association and so indicate by date, place and describe and attach any documents.
This interrogatory is inapplicable to answering defendant as it is not a "distributor."
45. (a) Do you contend that the employee plaintiff or, if deceased the plaintiff's decedent or his employer were contributori1> negligent?
(b) Do you contend that the employee plaintiff or if deceased the plaintiff's decedent assumed the risk of his employment? i' : Discovery is not yet complete and hence answering defendant cannot !yet respond to this interrogatory. I I
46. If the answer to interrogatory number 45 (a) , or 45 (b) is yes, please state in detail the factual basis for the contention and name Any witnesses you intend to produce to support this contention.
See response to the preceding interrogatory.
i -29-
17. Do you der.y that you so! : a: hcstos products to any places of employment of employee plaintiff o.\ if deceased the plaintiff's decedent, namely, Birk heed
Based on available corporate records, yes.
10. Do you deny that you sold asbestos products to the employe! of c.i rk Reed or t.o distributors whom you knfew would sell to the employers of
fa*
Dee response to the preceding interrogatory.
49. Did you or employees of your company ever attend meetings of the Asbestos Textile Institute or any of its committees? If yes,
(a) Identify the meetings and dates. i
(b) Who attended from your company.
(c) What materials were dispensed.
Answering defendant is not a member of the Asbestos" Textile Institut and hence this interrogatory is inapplicable.
50. Identify all individuals who are now or have ever been em ployed by you including their current address who can testify or hav< testified concerning: see attached.
(a) The history of that portion of your organization
responsible for preventive medicine or occupational hygiene.
(b) Your company medical policy, practices, and procedures.
(c) The history of that portion of your organization responsibl-
for product safety.
(d) The nature and extent of your knowledge, over time, of
health hazards actually, allegedly, or possibly associated with exposure to asbestos or asbestos products.
(e) Actions taken by you to warn, direct or indirect purchasers
of asbestos products or protect their employees of health-
hazards
(f) Actions taken
warn o: protect persons such as plaintiff
50. (a)-(f). Interrogatory 50 is vague and unintelligible and answering defendant does not understand what plaintiff means by the use of the terms "history of that portion of your organization" and "company medical policy, practices and procedures." Subpart (d) also is overbroad and irrelevant in that it seeks information beyond the subject matter of this lawsuit, plaintiff's decederit's alleged use of asbestos-containing products.
Furthermore, subpart (d) improperly assumes there are or may be hazards associated with the use of answering defendant's products, which answering defendant denies. Similarly, subparts (e) and (f) improperly assume the necessity of some unspecified warning and protection, which represent plaintiff's allegations and burden of proof herein. Thus, interrogatory 50 is objected to as phrased.
!
i ii j j
! I
30(a)
LIE8ERT. SHORT. FITZPATRICK & LAVIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I I ! I
I
31. If these employees have testified in depositions or trials with respect to the matters ennumerated in interrogatory 54, attach relevant portions of their testimony and identify the court, docket number of the case and date of testimony.
t
There is no interrogatory 54; however, see response to preceding interrogatory.
52. Did or does defendant maintain a medical library? if yes, state:
:a) Date established ib) Location (c) Names and addresses of librarians (d) Title, author, and publisher of all journals and book
bought or subscribed to during the period 1930-73. (:-) To whom journals in the area of asbestos, industrial
hygiene, medicine, safety or engineering were distri buted.
See attached page.
SHEIN S, BROOKKAN, P.A.
BY: ROBERT E. PAUL Attorney for Plaintiffs
LIEBERT, SHORT, FITZPATRICK & LAVIN
<\
BY: HARRY A.. SHORT, JR. Attorney for defendant Chrysler Corporation
52. The Industrial Hygiene and Medical Departments maintain reference libraries. Identification of librarians and journals and books contained therein is irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Certain literature, however, might relate to asbestos.
32(a)
LlEBERT. SHORT flTTPATamv * .
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COUNTY OF WAYNE
AFFIDAVIT
Jack L. Koblin, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is Senior Staff Counsel of Chrysler Corporation; that he is authorized to take this affidavit on behalf of Chrysler Corporation; that while he does not have personal knowledge of all the facts recited in the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories, the facts set forth therein were collected and made available to him by others and said facts are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE
ME THIS T/P' DAY* OF
1985
LISA RONCHcl TO Notary Public. Wayne County. Mich. My Commission Expires June 22.1987
LIEBERT. SHORT. FITZPATRICK & LAVIN ATTDBrjcvv at , aw