Document QXXDbEnJoM2j0nQ0ake80nwn6

FILE NAME Quebec Asbestos Mining Association QAMA DATE 1942 May 6 DOC QAMA003 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Solicitor Letter to Dr. Gardner RE Diagnosing Compensable Conditions Under Quebec Law vs 7 wae A ek i ole mene de 00s nn tmp af ord tage 7 cna 54 . medhncintaatthnietlinthcicrbtene f goa an didi PHONE PLateau 957 ROBINSON AND SABOURIN BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS Ivan SabouRIN K.C. Jonathan ROBINSON ALDRED building MONTREAL May 6 1942 Doctor Leroy U. Gardner Adelphia Hotel Philadelphia Pa U.S.A. Dear Doctor Re Payeur I beg to confirm our long distance telephone conversation of this morning when you were in New York City I am enclosing the proposed opinion which I have taken the liberty of drafting for you in view of the relative urgency of presenting it to Commissioner Sharpe a member of the local Board who intimated yesterday his desire of taking communication of same have At bottom pointed out what of page two and top of page three I recall you told me as regard the I dis- similarity of the two pathological conditions in the case of silicosis and to the effect in the case of asbestosis also that the tuberculosis in Payeur your opinion must have been anterior to his asbestosis I do not believe this will be disputed Under the local Quebec law infectious silicosis comprise as compensable if accompanied by intercurrent tuberculosis It thus becomes advisable here to point to the tuberculosis occurring before and not after asbestosis intercurrent in its pathological sense meaning " running between a malady setting in after another is already existing In view of this I have referred to tuberculosis and asbestosis in the proposed opinion as tuberculosis does complicated by asbestosis top page 1 and 1st par under heading " comment " I take it not change the purport of your opinion and it does prevent the reader here to be inclined to believe that asbestosis preceded and likely was causative of tuberculosis page 2 I have also deleted from your opinion worded for the benefit of my portions which I submit to you recpectfully do not seem to alter the meaning of the opinion as a whole that is of the conclusions are very informative but need not be tabled at this stage unless in rebuttal In short I have endeavoured to preserve the substance and trust that you will forgive me for drafting the document myself and not leaving to alone this task as this is your opinion and your respon- you Bibility But I would not have rushed matters thus had I not would be away for a week been told yesterday evening that you possibly if this is at all possible the draft is agreea- would you oblige me greatly and return me the opinion signed in duplicate by night's mail leaving Philadelphia mail 1.50 a.m. Thursday May 7th ; thus I would receive same Thursday here and file same in the afternoon I beg again for your indulgence Best personal regards ! / I Enclosed Vv draft in triplicate two to be returned ; envelope for return mail also This opinion document already has not signed by been filed Dr. Gardner or exhibited