Document QkZa3Xv82ZEzZxdJ3oM4KxXO4

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK t --------------------------------------------------------------------------------X In re In Proceedings for a Reorganization Under Chapter 11 JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION, et al Debtors. Casa Numbers 82 B 1165!? (BRL) Through 82 B 11676 (BRI.) X : JOSEPH McLOUGHLIN and HELEN !'McLOUGHLIN, et al., ji 'i Plaintiffs, Adversary Proceeding Number 82-6037 i! v. ! i!JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION, et al., i| !i Defendants. AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES H. ROEMER ji |j STATE OF NEW YORK . ;i 11 COUNTY OF NEW YORK i' Si,:s ) CHARLES H. ROEMER, being duly sworn, deposes and says? 1* I am an attorney who was admitted to practice in the State, of New Jersey in 1920 and presently maintain an office at 99 Broadway, Elmwood Park, Bergen-County., New Jersey. 2. l was born February 5, 1899 ^nd am presently under ^ the care of Dr. David Roth. ` 3. Sometime in 1942-43, I was advised by my cousin, Pr. Jacob Roemer, that in the course of reviewing chest x-rays of employees at the Union Asbestos and Rubber Company8s Paterson plant he had observed a significant number with lung changes' PLAINTIFFS * EXHIBIT I 33A25,00 WV-19769 which he believed were due to exposure to asbestos. Dr. Roemer suggested that the men be advised of his findings and that they secure outdoor employment which did not involve exposure to asbestos dust. Dr.. Roemer said unless this was done im mediately the men would suffer from painful asbestos diseases. 4. Immediately I reported what Dr. Roemer said to Robert Cryor, the Union Asbestos and Rubber Company Plant Manager and Edward Shuman, the Assistant Plant Manager. 5. I was then informed that in accordance with the labor union contract, the 5 or 6 employees in question could not be discharged without the consent of the union. The union refused to consent to their dismissal. 6. I then suggested that since Johns-Manville was the largest asbestos company in the country, we should set up an appointment to see how they were handling the asbestos health problem. 7. Mr., Cryor and Mr. Shuman set up an appointment with Johns-Manville. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Cryor, Mr. Shuman and I met with Vandiver Brown, General Attorney for JohnsManville and the President of the Corporation, at JohnsManville corporate headquarters in New York City. 8. We advised the Johns-Manville officials of Dr. Roemer's findings and asked them if Johns-Manville's physical examination program had turned up similar findings and, if so, what Johns-Manville was doing about it. - 2- 9. In response, Vandiver Brown stated that Johns-Manville's physical examination program had, indeed, also produced findings of x-ray evidence of asbestos disease among workers exposed to asbestos and that it was Johns-Manville's policy not to do anything nor to tell the employees of the x-ray findings. Vandiver Brown went on to say that it was foolish for us to be concerned and that if Johns-Manville's workers were told, they would stop working and file claims against Johns-Manville, and that it was Johns-Manville's policy to let them work until they quit work because of asbestosis or died as a result of asbestosrelated diseases. 10. Thereafter, we contacted Dr. Lanza at Saranac Lake, who was in charge of an asbestos exposure study and we were unable to gather any further advice or information from him. Sworn to before me this 29th day of September, 1982 francos c. ctmA Notary S;air o; r^w York No. A1 -f'-i / 57y3 Qualified in Queens County .Term Expires March 30, 1984