Document aB8KMwe5q9VQMo3zKwOMGgagM

(I PLAINTIFFS i EXHIBIT | E-63 CAUSE MO. 93-03625-1 HELEN GAMBRELL, Individually S IN THE DISTRICT COURT and as the Special Administratrix of the Estate of S ROBERT GAMBRELL, Deceased S DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS VS. sS s THE ABER COMPANY, ET AL. 162ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEPENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'8 AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'B MASTER BET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO: Helen Gambrell, by and through her attorney of record, Mr. Russell W. Budd, BARON & BUDD, The Centrum, 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 1100, Dallas, Texas 75219. COME NOW, Defendants Appleton Electric Company and Emerson Electric Co. (hereinafter Appleton Electric Company), and make and file this their Answers and Objections to Plaintiff's Master Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production and would show unto the Court as follows: INTERROGATORY NO. Is INTERROGATORIES State the name, address, job title, length of time employed by Defendant, a year-by-year list of all other positions, titles, or jobs held when working for Defendant of each person who has supplied any information used in answering these interrogatories. RESPONSE; Patrick Henry Appleton Electric Company 701 W. Wellington Avenue Chicago, IL 60657-4097 DEFENDANTS APPEgTON ELECTRIC COMPANY'8 AMD EMERSON ET.gCTRIC CO. S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST TOR PRODUCTION PAGE 1 F:\EDW\Q5300.INT INTERROGATORY WO. 2: State whether or not you are a corporation. If so, state your correct corporate name, the state of your incorporation, the address of your principal place of business, the name and address of the person or entity authorized to accept service of process on your behalf, and whether or not you have ever held a Certificate of Authority to do business in the State of Texas. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company is a corporation incorporated in the state of Delaware with its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois. CT Corporation is authorized to accept service on behalf of Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 3i Has Defendant or any of its predecessor or subsidiary companieb at any time engaged in the mining and subsequent sale of material containing asbestos fibers? If so, identify the location of the mine(s), the years of its operation, the type of asbestos mined and whether you sold any asbestos to any Defendants in the Dallas County asbestos litigation. RESPONSE: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Identify by name each product containing asbestos fibers that Defendant or any of its predecessor or subsidiary companies at any time manufactured or sold. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSOM RT.ECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 2 F:\EDW\Q5300.INT RESPONSE Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Identify by name each product containing asbestos fibers that Defendant or any of its predecessor or subsidiary companies at any time marketed or sold. RESPONSE; Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton DEFENDANTS APPUCTOM WT.BCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF * S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 3 P:\EDW\Q5300.INT Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY WO. 68 If the answer to one or more of the last three interrogatories is in the affirmative or lists any products, state as to each named product the following: A. As to each product, state whether such product was mined, manufactured, marketed, and/or sold. B. The names of the companies mining, manufacturing, marketing, and/or selling each product mined, manufactured, marketed, and/or sold. C. The trade or brand name of each of those products mined, manufactured, marketed and/or sold. D. The date each of the named products was placed on the market. E. A description of the physical (chemical) composition of each of the named products, including the type of asbestos contained in the product and the percentage of asbestos put in each product. F. The date each of the products was removed from the market and no longer sold or distributed and the reason or reasons, therefor. G. The date asbestos was removed from such products, if ever, and the reasons therefor. DEPENDANTS APPLETOW ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMP OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST POR PRODUCTION PAGE 4 F:\EDW\GttOO.INT H. A description of the physical appearance of each of the named products. X. A detailed description of the intended uses of the named products. J. Identify the last year that you sold each asbestos- containing product. RESPONSE; Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 7? Do any documents, including but not limited to written memoranda, specifications, recommendations, blueprints, or other written materials of any kind or character, relating to the design, preparation, or introduction into the market of the products listed in Interrogatory No. 6 still exist? If so, state: DEPENDAMTS APPT.WTOM RT.WCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 5 F:\EDW\05300.JNT A. A description of each such statement. B. The name, address, and job title of each person who currently has possession of each document, and where the documents are currently located. RESPONSE; Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 8S Before distributing, selling, or placing the products listed in your responses to Interrogatory Nos. 3-6 into the streams of commerce, were any tests conducted to determine potential health hazards involved in the use of, or exposure to, the materials such as asbestos, contained in those products? If the answer is affirmative, state: DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 6 P:\EDW\05300.INT A. The names of the products tested and the date of each test. B. The name, address, and job title of each person conducting the tests or involved with conducting the tests. C. The results of the tests. RESPONSES Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO, 9s Do any documents, including but not limited to written memoranda, specifications, recommendations, blueprints, or other written materials of any kind or character, relating to the testing of the products referred to in Interrogatory No. 6 now exist? If so, state: DEFENDANTS RPPLBTnv *T.*CTRIC COMPANY*8 AND EMERSON gt,BCTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 7 F:\EDW\05300.INT A. A description of each such document. B. The name, address, and job title of each person who currently has possession of each document, and where it is presently located. RESPONSEX Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO, 10: Did Defendant or any of its predecessor subsidiary companies make any design changes or modifications as a result of those tests described in responses to Interrogatory No. 8? If the answer is affirmative, state: A. The trade names of the products changed. B. The nature of the changes made and the date of such changes or modifications. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY *S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 8 P:\fiDWW5300.INT C. The name, address, and job title of each person responsible for having caused a change to be made, or having made a change or modification. RE8P0NSEX Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 11: After releasing the products listed in Interrogatory No. 6 to the public, were any tests conducted on them to determine potential health hazards resulting from the use of or exposure to the materials, such as asbestos, contained in those products? If the answer is affirmative, state: A. The names of the products tested and the dates of such tests. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ttT.RCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 9 F:\EDW\05300.INT B. The name, address, and job title of each person who conducted those tests, C. The results of those tests. D. Whether, as a result of the tests, any products were removed from the market. E. The names of all products removed from the market as a result of these tests. response: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Do any documents, including written memoranda, specifications, recommendations, blueprints, or other written materials of any kind or character, relating to the potential health hazards of the products listed in Interrogatory No. 6 now exist? If so, state: DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 10 F:\EDW\05300.INT A. The name of each product. B. A description of each document and how it relates to each product. C. The name, address, and job title of each person who currently has possession of each document, and where it is presently located. RESPONSEt Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestoscontaining product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 13s Did Defendant or any of its subsidiary companies make any design changes as a result of the tests discussed in your response to Interrogatory No. 10 or 13? state: If the answer is affirmative, A. The names of the products changed or modified. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AMP EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 11 F:\EDW\QS300.INT B. The name, address, and job title of each person responsible for having made a change or modification. C. The nature of the hazard or defect which resulted in such change or modification. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 14: Has Defendant or any of its predecessor or subsidiary companies at any time published or distributed any printed material, including brochures, pamphlets, catalogs, packaging or written material or any kind or character containing any warnings concerning the possibility of injury resulting from the use of the asbestos-containing products listed in Interrogatory No. 6? If so, state: DEFENDANTS APPLETON KT.RCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\05300.INT PAGE 12 A. The names of each relevant product. B. The exact wording of each warning statement on each printed material. C. A description of the printed material other than the warning statement. D. The method used to distribute the warning to persons likely to use the product. E. The date each warning was first issued, distributed, or placed on packaging. F. The name, address, and job title of each person responsible for having drafted or issued the warning. G. The current location of any such printed material and the custodian thereof. H. The form in which such literature or printed material can be accessed, i.e. . the manner in which such literature is indexed or stored. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSOH ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 13 P:\EDVA05300.INT Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NQ. 15: Before 1970, had you received notice that any individual or individuals, other than those Plaintiffs who have filed personal injury actions in Dallas County, Texas, is or are claiming or has or have claimed an injury as a result of using asbestos products manufactured and/or sold by your company or any of its predecessors or subsidiaries before 1970? If so, state: A. The name and address of each claimant. B. The date of notice of each claim. C. A description of the claim. D. The type of injuries allegedly sustained. E. The name and address of each attorney who represents each individual making a claim. F. The style and court number of each claim. G. The disposition of each claim that has been settled or taken to judgment. RESPONSES Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AMP EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\05300.INT PAGE 14 objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company is not aware of any claims referred to in this interrogatory. INTERROGATORY WO. 16 Were your asbestos products distributed, marketed, packaged, labeled and/or sold by companies other than your own? If the answer is affirmative, list the names and addresses of each of those companies, and the products in question. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objection and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not distribute, market, package, label or sale an asbestos-containing product by itself or through any other company during the time period in which Plaintiff alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products as Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute any asbestos-containing products during that time period. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 17i Did you or any of your predecessors, successors, or subsidiaries have any distributors or sales representatives of asbestos products in the States of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, DEFENDANTS APPTJCTQW FT.BCTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\G5300.INT PAGE 15 Oregon, Washington, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia? If so, state: A. The name and address of each such distributor or sales representatives. B. The years in which such company or person distributed, marketed, or sold your products. C. What products were distributed, marketed, or sold and in what years. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objection and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not distribute, market, package, label or sale an asbestos-containing product by itself or through any other company during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products as Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute any asbestos-containing products during that time period. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 18: List each employee (including only physicians and/or hygienists) who has acted in a medical advisory capacity to your DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMEPSOM gr.ECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMD OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:VEDVA05300.INT PAGE 16 company at any time during the past 40 years, including, but not limited to, physicians and industrial hygienists, and the current address, telephone number and job title of each of those individuals and who has, had or may have had any knowledge regarding the hazards of asbestos. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company had no such employee requested in this interrogatory. INTERROGATORY NO. 19: Does Defendant have in its possession any books, pamphlets, memoranda, or written materials of any kind or character that would indicate that asbestos fibers, when inhaled, can be hazardous to the health of human beings? If so, state: A. The name of each such publication. B. The date of publication and the names of the author and publisher (if any). C. The date received by Defendant, if known. D. The name, job title, and address of each person who currently has possession of each publication and its present location. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 17 F:\EDVAQ5300.INT RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Appleton Electric Company further objects to the extent this interrogatory seeks information protected by the attorney-client, attorney work product, investigation and party communication privileges. However, subject to said objections and without same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 20! Has Defendant or any of its subsidiary or predecessor companies at any time been a member of any trade organization or association that published or disseminated any documents or information relating to the hazards of asbestos comprised of other manufacturers, miners, marketers, and/or sellers of asbestos products? If so, state: A. The name and address of each such association or organization. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AMD EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF 'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 18 F:\EDW\05300.INT B. The dates during which Defendant or any of its subsidiaries or predecessors were members. C. The names and dates of any publications, minutes, or reports published, written, or disseminated by any of the named associations or organizations. D. Whether any of those publications are still in your possession, and if so: X. A description of the publications, including the date. 2. The current location of such publications. 3. The custodian of such publications. 4. The method or manner in which such publications are RESPONSE: maintained. Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company is not aware of any trade organization of which it was a member that published or disseminated any documents relating to the hazards of asbestos. INTERROGATORY NO. 21: Identify by name and location each plant or manufacturing facility in which the products listed in your answers to DEFENDANTS APPLKTON FTT.FCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. 'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 19 F:\EDVA05300.INT Interrogatory Nos. 3-6 were manufactured, assembled, or prepared for sale or marketing, specifying which plants produced each item, the dates each plant is or was in operation, and the time span during which each named item was produced or manufactured. RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 22 S Have printed sales materials been prepared by Defendant or any of its subsidiary or predecessor companies or their agents for purposes of marketing or advertising products containing asbestos? If so, state: A. The name, address, and job title of each person or entity who prepared such materials. DEFENDANTS APPUTPOM Kt-BCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMEF&rtM Wt,WCTRIC CO. ' S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 20 F:\EDW\05300.INT B. The name, address, and job title of each person who currently has possession of such materials and their present location. C. The date the materials were prepared. D. The media used to disseminate the sales materials. RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO, 23: Have any written or printed materials or instructions of any kind or character been prepared by Defendant or any of its subsidiary or predecessor companies or their agents indicating how asbestos products should be used and maintained? If so, state: DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSON FT.FgTRTC CO.'S ANSWERS AMD OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\05300.INT PAGE 21 A. The name, address, and job title of each person who prepared such materials or instructions or assisted in their preparation. B. The name, address and job title of each person who currently has possession of such materials or instructions and their present locatio. C. The dates of distribution or use and the manner in which such materials or instructions were distributed to purchasers of Defendant's products or those of its subsidiaries or predecessors. D. The year each such written material or instruction was prepared and disclosed to potential consumers. RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF * S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 22 F:\HDVA03300.INT INTERROGATORY NO. 24: Does Defendant have insurance policies that might cover the claims made by Plaintiffs in these cases? If so, list the name of each insurance carrier, the amount of initial coverage, amount of coverage remaining at the present time, and the effective dates of each policy. (If properly answered, this Interrogatory need not be supplemented as to the remaining amount of coverage). RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company is self-insured. INTERROGATORY NO. 25! As to the disease asbestosis, state: A. The date on which Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor first learned that such disease was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers by humans. B. How Defendant became aware of the existence of the disease. C. Who within the company first discovered, recognized or understood the adverse consequences or effects of the disease and/or of asbestos exposure. D. What information was disseminated within Defendant's company or its subsidiary or predecessor regarding such adverse consequences or effects. E. Whether any such information is still maintained by Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor in any written form. DEFENDANTS APPLETOW ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMEPSOM ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMP OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST POR PRODUCTION PAGE 23 F:\EDW\05300.INT F. Who is the custodian of such information. G. The date on which you first received knowledge or information that asbestosis was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers. RESPONSEt Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 26s As to the disease lung cancer, state: A. The date on which Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor first learned that such disease was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers by human. B. How Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor became aware of the disease and its relationship to asbestos exposure. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'8 AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AKD OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDWVX100.1NT PAGE 24 C. Who within the company or its subsidiary or predecessor first discovered or recognized the adverse consequences or effects of asbestos exposure. D. What information was disseminated within Defendant's company or its subsidiary or predecessor regarding such adverse consequences or effects. E. Whether any such information is still maintained by Defendants or its subsidiaries or predecessors in a written form. F. Who is the custodian of such information. G. The date on which you first received knowledge or information that lung cancer was caused by inhalation of asbestos dust and fibers. RESPONSE; Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 25 F:\EDW\0S300.JNT INTERROGATORY NO. 27: As to pleural disease# pleural thickening or pleural plaques, state: A. The date on which Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor learned such disease was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers by human. B. How Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor became aware of the disease and that it was caused by exposure to asbestos. C. Who within the company or its subsidiary or predecessor first discovered or recognized the adverse consequences or effects of asbestos exposure. D. What information was disseminated within Defendant's company or its subsidiary or predecessor regarding such adverse consequences or effects. E. Whether any such information is still maintained by Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor in written form. F. Who is the custodian of such information. RESPONSES Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did DEFENDANTS APPLFTOM FT.FQTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.*8 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 26 P:\EDW\03300.INT not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 28S As to the disease mesothelioma, state: A. The date on which Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor first learned such disease was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers by humans. B. The date on which Defendant first suspected that mesothelioma was caused by inhalation of asbestos dust and .fibers. C. How Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor became aware of the disease ant that it was caused by exposure to asbestos. D. Who within the company or its subsidiary or predecessor first discovered or recognized the adverse consequences or effects of asbestos exposure. E* What information was disseminated within Defendant's company or its subsidiary or predecessor regarding such adverse consequences or effects. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND BMEPSQM RT^CTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 27 F:\EDVA05300.INT F. Whether any such information is still maintained by Defendants or its subsidiary or predecessor in a written form. G. Who is the custodian of such information. H. Whether Defendant agrees that there is no known medical cure for mesothelioma. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 29S As to gastro-intestinal cancer, laryngeal cancer, pharyngeal cancer or lymphatic cancer, state: A. The type of cancer and the date on which Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor first learned that such diseases were caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers by humans. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 28 F:\EDW\05300.INT B. What cancers has the Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor become aware can be caused by exposure to asbestos fibers? C. The date on which Defendant first suspected other cancers were caused by asbestos inhalation. D. Who within the company or its subsidiary or predecessor first discovered the adverse consequences or effects of asbestos exposure. E. What information was disseminated with Defendant's company or its subsidiary or predecessor regarding such adverse consequences or effects. F. Whether any such information is still maintained by Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor in a written form. G. Who is the custodian of such information. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AMD EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 29 F:\EDW\0S3Q0.INT sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 301 Does Defendant contend that asbestos products can be manufactured or designed so as to eliminate all potential health hazards to persons working with or exposed to them? If the answer is affirmative, explain in detail, and attach any studies or surveys on which this answer is based. response: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 31: Describe in detail the types of packages or packaging which Defendant or any of its subsidiary or predecessor companies used for asbestos material or products, listing the dates each type of DEFENDANT'S APPT.ETON ELECTRIC COMPANY' S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 30 F:\EDW\QS300.JNT package was used, a physical description of each type of package, and providing a description of any printed material or trademarks that appeared thereon. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence. However, subject to said objection and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not distribute, market, package, label or sale an asbestos- containing product by itself or through any other company during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos- containing products as Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute any asbestos-containing products during that time period. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 32: Has Defendant or any of its subsidiary or predecessor companies at any time entered into a rebranding" agreement with any other company, either as a buyer or seller, concerning asbestos materials or asbestos products? agreement: If so, state, as to each such A. The name of the company manufacturing the asbestos products. B. The trade name affixed to those products. C. The periods of time covered by each such agreement. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERR^m T.KrrRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF/ S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\QJ300.INT PAGE 31 D. The volume, in dollar amount, of each transaction. E. The initial purchaser of the products. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objection and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not distribute, market, package, label or sale an asbestos-containing product by itself or through any other company during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products as Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute any asbestos-containing products during that time period. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 33: List the name and address of each company from which Defendant or its subsidiary or predecessor purchased materials or asbestos products which Defendant sold or distributed in any form, stating the form of the materials, the dates of such purchases, and the ultimate disposal of such materials. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PRODUCTION PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR '' pAGE 32 F:\EDW\05300.INT which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos** containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 34i Does Defendant or any of its subsidiary or predecessor currently have possession of any writings or contracts on those rebranding agreements set forth in the answer to Interrogatory No. 32? If the answer is affirmative, state: A. The name, address, and job title of each person having custody of each of those documents and their current location. B. A brief description of each such document, including the dates and the parties signatory. response: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AMD EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 33 F:\EDW\QS300.INT objection and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not distribute, market, package, label or sale an asbestos-containing product by itself or through any other company during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products as Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute any asbestos-containing products during that time period. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 35S Prior to 1968, did any person file a claim against a Worker's Compensation carrier covering Defendant or any of its subsidiaries or predecessors alleging that he/she contracted a disease from inhaling asbestos fibers? If so, provide: A. A list of the claims, including each claimant's name, address and the date each claim was filed, and including the caption and jurisdiction of the claim. B. The disease alleged in each such claim. C. A brief summary of the disposition of each such claim. D. The name, address and title of the person having custody of the records pertaining to each such claim. RESPONSE: No. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY/S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMD OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF*S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 34 F:\EDW\Q5300.INT INTERROGATORY NO. 36l Did Defendant or any of its subsidiaries or predecessors maintain written minutes or corporate meetings, either board of directors, departmental, or otherwise, which reflect discussions pertaining to any subject matter related to asbestos, asbestos health hazards or asbestos products? If so, for each such set of minutes, state: A. The dates of each such meeting. B. The general subject matter discussed at each meeting. C. Who was in attendance at each meeting. D. Where and by whom the written minutes are presently maintained. E. By whom the minutes were taken and put into final format. F. Whether the minutes were abstracted and reports disseminated to other individuals, and if so, the names and job titles of those individuals. RESPONSE; Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.* 8 ANSWERS AMD OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 35 F:\EDW\05300.INT Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 371 Do you or any of your subsidiaries, including foreign business entities, currently manufacture any products containing asbestos? If so, state: A. As to each product, whether such product is mined, manufactured, and/or marketed or sold. B. The names and addresses of the companies mining, manufacturing, marketing, and/or selling each of those products. C. The trade or brand name of each of those products mined, manufactured, marketed, and/or sold. D. The date each of the named products was placed on the market. E. A description of the physical (chemical) composition of each of the named products, including the type of asbestos contained in the product. F. A description of the physical appearance of each product and its packaging. G. A detailed description of the intended uses of each of the named products. DEPENDANTS APPT.gTON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 36 F:\EDW\05300.1NT H. Whether there are any warning labels on said products or containers regarding potential asbestos-related health hazards. responsb: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objection and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company does not now nor during the time period during which Decedent alleges exposure did it manufacture, sell or distribute any products containing asbestos. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 38: State whether you or any of your predecessors and/or subsidiaries maintain, from 1940 through the present or for any portion thereof, copies of invoices, shipping documents, bills of lading, purchase orders, or other documents of a similar nature relating to the mining, manufacture, marketing, sale or distribution of asbestos products. If so, state: A. The location of such documents. B. The name and address of the custodian of the documents. C. The format in which the documents are kept, i.e., hard copy, microfilm, microfiche, etc. DEPENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSON RT.^CTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS__ TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDWQS300.INT PAGE 37 D. In what form the documents can be accessed, i.e., by state, by product, etc., and if by product, whether kept according to asbestos or non-asbestos. RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states it is not aware of any documents which indicate it manufactured, sold or distributed any asbestos-containing products. INTERROGATORY NO. 39: May you call company representatives as witnesses at the trial of any of these case? If so, list: A. The name, address, and job title of each company representative who may be called. B. A summary of the testimony expected to be given by each such witness. C. List any and all previous times that the named witnesses have either given deposition or trial testimony in an asbestos-related case, including the jurisdiction, style of the case, case number, date of testimony, and the name of the attorney taking the deposition for the Plaintiffs in that case. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\0S300.INT PAGE 38 RESPONSE* Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is beyond the permissible scope of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166b and that no product of Appleton Electric Company has been identified by Plaintiff. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company has not made a determination as to what company representatives it may call as witnesses at the trial of these cases. Possible company representatives include Patrick Henry and Donald Knueven, Chief Engineer. Appleton Electric Company is unable to provide a summary of anticipated testimony as no product has been identified by Plaintiff. Once the product is identified, Appleton Electric Company will supplement this response pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. INTERROGATORY NO. 40: Have Defendant or its subsidiaries or predecessors ever acquired through purchase, reorganization, or merger another corporation, company, or business which manufactured, sold, processed, distributed, or contracted or supplied products containing asbestos? If so, for each such entity, state: A. Full and correct name; B. Principal place of business; C. state of incorporation; D. Date of acquisition by Defendant; DEPENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ET-ECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION F:\EDW\QS300.INT PAGE 39 E. Whether or not the business entity was ever authorized to transact business in the state of Texas; BMPM* Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company has not purchased, reorganized or merged with another corporation, company or business which manufactured, sold, processed, distributed, or contracted or supplied products containing asbestos. INTERROGATORY NO. 41i Was each of your asbestos products generally expected to reach, or packaged to reach, the consumer or user, without substantial change in the condition in which it was sold? If not, with respect to any such product, explain in what way the Defendant claims its products were altered or substantially changed after sale or distribution and before reaching the user. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company's DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ET,BCTttIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 40 F:\EDW\05300.INT products were expected to reach the consumer or user in the same package the product was placed in when it left Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 42t For each asbestos-containing product identified in response to Interrogatory No. 6, identify all foreseeable users such as insulators, helpers, pipefitters, welders, machinists, plasterers, drywall finishers, carpenters, boilermakers, shipwrights and riggers, etc. of any of Defendant's asbestos-containing products. RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it seeks a legal conclusion. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did. not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company, but Appleton Electric Company's products foreseeable users are electricians. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY * 8 AND EMERSON FT.FQTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMP OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 41 F:\EDW\QS300.INT INTERROGATORY NO. 43: Based upon the material contents of your asbestos-containing products, the method of manufacturing, and the method of application, can such products be generally applied without liberating asbestos fibers into the air? A. If there is a different answer concerning different products manufactured, sold, distributed, or used by your company, then specify the different products by precise manufacturer's name and popular name. B. If there is a difference in your answer depending on the year or years in which a particular product was used, then specify in detail what year or years you are referring to and the specific products you are referring to and year involved. RESPONSE; Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos- containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. DEFENDANTS OBJECTIONS PRODUCTION P:\EDW\G5300.INT APPLETON ELECTRIC TO PLAINTIFF* S COMPANY * S AND EMERSON gT-ECTRTC CO.'S ANSWERS AND MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PAGE 42 Therefore, no asbestos can be released by an Appleton Electric Company product. INTERROGATORY WO. 441 Was it a foreseeable use of you asbestos-containing products that they may have been removed, stripped, or replaced at some time after installation? response: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it seeks a legal conclusion. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 45: Before 1970, did you or your subsidiaries or predecessor(s) ever arrange for any labor inspectors, insurance company inspectors or anyone from your company to go to job sites where your products were being used or installed to make or take dust level counts? If DEFENDANTS APPLETON FT.RCTRIC COMPANY/S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF' 8 MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 43 P:\EDVA05300.JNT so, state when this procedure started, the purpose of such procedures, and all results of such procedures. RESPONSE Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, irrelevant and seeks information which is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client and the attorney work product privileges. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not arrange for such inspections since it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 46: If Defendant performed or had performed any dust level counts, what action, based on the results, did your company take? RESPONSES Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it assumes facts not in evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not arrange for such inspections since it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in DEFENDANTS APPLETON EUSCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION P:\EDW\05300.INT PAGE 44 which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. This interrogatory is not applicable to Appleton Electric Company. INTERROGATORY NO. 47i Has your company or its subsidiaries or predecessor(s) ever conducted or caused to be conducted any studies designed to assist in minimizing or eliminating the inhalation of asbestos dust and fibers by those exposed to the use of your company's products? If so, give the following: A. Name of the person or firm conducting such studies; B. The date the studies began and the date they were completed; C. Any publication or other written dissemination of the results of the studies; D. The nature of any action to eliminate or minimize the inhalation of asbestos dust fibers; RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not arrange for such studies since it did not manufacture, sell or DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. *8 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 45 P:\EDW\05300.INT distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO.481 Does your company have, has it ever had, or have your predecessor(s) or subsidiaries ever had, a Research Department? If so, give the year such Research Department was established, and whether or not such Research Department has operated continuously since being established. State also: A. The amount of time and money expended each year on research concerning asbestos or asbestos-containing products? B. What percentage of gross sales did your company or its predecessor(s) spend on research concerning the health effects of asbestos? C. State in detail the purposes, duties, and responsibilities of such Research Department. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company has DEPENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PRODUCTION F:\EDVA05300.INT PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PAGE 46 a research department but is not aware of any research concerning asbestos-containing products being performed since Appleton Electric Company has no documents indicating it manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos-containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 49: Does your company have, or has it ever had, or have your predecessor(s) or subsidiaries ever had, a Medical Department? If so, state: A. The year such Medical Department was established; B. Whether or not such Medical Department has operated continuously since being established; C. The name of each director, chief, or head of your Medical Department year by year, beginning with the first year you had a Medical Director or Medical Department, and the last known address and phone number of each; D. State the duties and responsibilities of such Medical Department. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company does not have a medical department. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 47 F:\EDW\QS300.INT INTERROGATORY NO. 50l Did your company or its predecessor(s) or subsidiaries ever place any warning directly on any of its asbestos-containing product or on their packaging. If so, identify the product(s) and year said warning was first applied. RESPONSES Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to such products. Therefore this interrogatory is not applicable. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 51? Did your company or its predecessor(s) or subsidiaries ever stamp or place the name of the company, its initials, or any identifying logo on any of its asbestos-containing products? If so, please state the name brand names of such products, a description of such stamp or logo and the dates such were placed on the referred products. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 48 F:\EDVA05300.INT RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to such products. Therefore this interrogatory is not applicable. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 52: Has your company, or your predecessor(s) or subsidiaries, ever devised a research plan to develop, or actually developed or had developed, a product which did not contain asbestos and which could be substituted for one or more of your asbestos-containing products? If so, state the date that such research plan was begun and when such asbestos-free product was first placed on the market. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY' S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 49 P:\EDWi05300.BiT not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to such products. Therefore this interrogatory is not applicable. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY NO. 53: Did your company or its predecessor(s) or subsidiaries ever recall any products containing asbestos from the market or stream of commerce? If so, state: A. All details of such recall; B. The name of the product recalled, including the reason for the recall and the names and current addresses of those individuals who determined that it should take place; C. The dates of recall; D. The purpose for the recall. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to such DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSOM PT^ECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIPP' S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 50 F:\EDW\05300.tNT products. Therefore this interrogatory is not applicable. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY WO. 54t Before 1970, did you ever manufacture or sell products which did not contain asbestos and which could be substituted for your asbestos-containing products? If so, state the date such asbestosfree products were first placed on the market. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to such products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore this interrogatory is not applicable. INTERROGATORY MO. 55: Have any products you identified in your response to Interrogatory Nos. 52 and 54 not performed as intended? Please list all such products that have not performed as intended. DEFENDANTS APPLETOM BI^CTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON RTJgeTPTC CO.* 8 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 51 P:\EDW\Q5300.INT RESPONSE! Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to such products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore this interrogatory is not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 56: Did your company or its predecessor (s) or subsidiaries ever make, order, or arrange for any industrial hygiene surveys regarding asbestos or asbestos-containing dust? If so, give the date of such surveys and state who, or what entity, was responsible for completion of such surveys. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not arrange for any industrial hygiene surveys regarding asbestos DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECOTTG COMPANY*S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.*8 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PIAINTIPF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 52 F:\EDWVQ5300.INT or asbestos-containing dust as it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which Decedent alleges exposure to asbestos. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. INTERROGATORY WO, 57t As to either the threshold limit values or maximum allowable concentrations of both asbestos dust and total dust provided by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, state: A. The year in which Defendant or any predecessor(s) or subsidiaries were first advised of such limits or concentrations; B. The name of the employee or official of the company receiving such advice; C. How Defendant received notice of such limits or concentrations. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to an asbestos-containing product. Furthermore, Appleton Electric DEFENDANTS APPLETON PT.FCTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMP OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 53 F:\EDW\05300.INT Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Appleton Electric Company is not aware of ever being advised of threshold limit values or maximum allowable concentrations. INTERROGATORY NO. 58t Were the threshold limit values or maximum allowable concentrations inquired about in Interrogatory no. 63 for total dust, and not asbestos dust alone? RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to an asbestos-containing product. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Appleton Electric Company is not aware of ever being advised of threshold limit values or maximum allowable concentrations. INTERROGATORY NO. 59: State in detail what tests, if any, Defendant ever made with regard to the quantity, quality, or threshold limit values of asbestos dust or particles to which workers were exposed while DEFENDANTS APPU5TON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 54 F:\EDW\05300.INT using, working with or around, or installing your asbestos- containing products. response: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence and seeks information which is not relevant nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject to said objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to an asbestos-containing product. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Appleton Electric Company is not aware of ever being advised of threshold limit values or maximum allowable concentrations. INTERROGATORY NO. 60: Please state the following with respect to each expert witness that you may call during trial of these cases. Please designate with specificity the expert witnesses that you will call, including: (a) The name, address, and job classification of each such expert witness; (b) The subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify; DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION P:\EDW\Oj300.BfT PAGE 55 (c) The substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion; (d) Whether any person identified in subparagraph (a) above has provided a report or other documentation to you, and if so, identify each such document or report; (e) Identify all documents that you have provided to each person identified in response to subparagraph (a) above; (f) Describe in detail the education and work history of, and identify any books, treatises, articles, published and unpublished reports, studies or other scholarly works authored by any individual identified in response to subparagraph (a) above. Alternatively, in lieu of said response, attach a copy of a resume or curriculum vitae and a list of publications to your answers. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks information beyond the permissible scope of discovery pursuant to Rule 166b of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. However, at this time, Appleton Electric Company has not made a determination concerning experts. A list of potential experts is attached as Exhibit "A". INTERROGATORY NO. 61: Please state the name, present address and present telephone number, along with the experience and qualifications, if DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 56 P:\EDVA05300.INT applicable, of each and every person, known to Defendant or to Defendant's agents, having knowledge of facts relevant to these cases involving, but not limited to: (a) identification of asbestos-containing products to which each and every individual Plaintiff, separate and distinct from all other Plaintiffs within the group, allegedly was exposed or facts disputing the identification of asbestos-containing products in this case. (b) Each and every individual Plaintiff's, separate and distinct from all other Plaintiffs within the group, alleged damages, injuries and/or facts disputing each and every Plaintiff's alleged damages and/or injuries; (c) the negligence of any person or entity other than Defendant which Defendant contends was a cause of each and every individual Plaintiff's, separate and distinct from all other Plaintiffs within the group, alleged injuries and/or damages; (d) each of Defendant's defenses enumerated in Defendant's last filed Answer in each of these cases. response: Keathley Patterson Electric Company employees, Pine Bluff, Arkansas Co-workers designated by the individual Plaintiffs. Potential experts on Exhibit "A", attached hereto. DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.* 8 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 57 F:\EDW\Q53QO.tNT Discovery is ongoing at this time and Appleton Electric Company will supplement this response pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. INTERROGATORY-NO. 621 Please identify documents which will be used at time of trial, (Exhibit List, Deposition List), which are relevant to each of Defendant's enumerated defenses in Defendant's last filed Answer. RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it seeks information protected by the attorney-client and attorney work product privileges. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it seeks information beyond the scope of the Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166b. INTERROGATORY NO. 63i When, if ever, did Defendant or any of its predecessors-ininterest first receive a copy of the article entitled "A Health Survey of Pipe Covering Operations in Constructing Naval Vessels", published in January, 1946 in the Journal of Industrial Hygiene & Toxicology, and authored by W. Fleischer and P. Drinker, et al ("the Fleischer-Drinker Report")? a. Identify the name and position of the employee or officer who received same; b. please produce all documents generated by Defendant which discuss or in any way reference the "Fleischer-Drinker" study prior to 1968; DEPENDANTS APPT.TTTON gT.gCTOTC COMPANY' S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AMD OBJECTIONS TO PIAINTIFP'S MASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 58 F:\EDVAQ5300.INT c. please produce all documents upon which your responses above are based; d. please identify the name(s) and address(s) of any person(s) who can verify your above response; e. did Defendant ever rely on the Fleischer-Drinker Report in whole or in part as a basis that Defendant's asbestos products could be used in the workplace without risk of asbestos-related health impacts to the consumer and/or bystander; f. if so, please produce every document which evidences in any way that Defendant relied on the Fleischer-Drinker Report in whole or in part for the proposition stated in Interrogatory No. 63(a) above; g. if your answer to 63(e) is yes, when was the first date Defendant relied on the Fleischer-Drinker report in whole or in part for the proposition stated in 63(e) above? RESPONSES Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it seeks information which is protected by the attorney-client, attorney work product and party communication privileges. Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos DEPENDAMTS APPLwtom WT.BCTRIC COMPANY * S AND EMERSON RT.BCTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 59 P:\EDW\05300.INT containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 64: When, if ever, did Defendant or any of its predecessors-in- interest first receive a copy of the article entitled "A Study of Asbestos in the Asbestos Textile Industry", published in 1938 in Public Health Bill, No. 241, U.S. Public Health Service and authored by W.C. Dreessen ("the Dreessen Report")? a. Identify the name and position of the employee or officer who received same; b. please produce all documents generated by Defendant which discuss or in any way reference the "Dreessen" study prior to 1968; c. please produce all documents upon which your responses above are based; d. please identify the name(s) and address(es) of any person(s) who can verify your above response; e. did Defendant ever rely on the Dreessen Report in whole or in part as a basis that Defendant's asbestos products could be used in the workplace without risk of asbestosrelated health impacts to the consumer and/or bystander; f. if so, please produce every document which evidences in any way that Defendant relied on the Dreessen Report in whole or in part for the proposition stated in Interrogatory No. 63(a) above; DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF* S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 60 F:\EDWVQS300.1NT g. if your answer to 63(e) is yes, when was the first date Defendant relied on the Dreessen report in whole or in part for the proposition stated in 63(e) above? RESPONSE: Appleton Electric Company objects to this interrogatory as it seeks information which is protected by the attorney-client, attorney work product and party communication privileges. Appleton Electric Company did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. Therefore, this interrogatory is not applicable. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. li Please produce a true and correct copy of each photograph of each asbestos-containing product identified in answer to Interrogatory No. 4. ANSWER: Appleton Electric Company objects to this Request for Production as it is overbroad, assumes facts not in evidence, and seeks information which is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. However, subject DEFENDANTS. APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY' S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 61 F:\EDVV\Q5300.INT to sdid objections and without waiving same, Appleton Electric Company states that it did not manufacture, sell or distribute an asbestos-containing product during the time period in which decedent alleges exposure to asbestos-containing products. Furthermore, Appleton Electric Company has found no records which indicate it ever manufactured, sold or distributed an asbestos containing product. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 2: Please produce any diagrams or schematics indicating, stating or detailing the existence of any of your subsidiaries, predecessors, or divisions as defined on Page 1 of these Interrogatories and Request for Production. ANSWERS No such documents exist. Respectfully submitted, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P. 1500 Maxus Energy Tower 717 North Harwood Street Dallas, Texas 75201-6508 Telephone (214) 953-5454 Telecopier (214) 953-5455 Q.OJeujcUD_________ GAR? D. ELLISTON State Bar No. 06584700 ERIC D. WEWERS State Bar No. 21236650 DEFENDANTS APPLETON ELECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S WASTER SET OP INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 62 F:\EDW\G5300.INT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document has been forwarded to counsel for Plaintiff, by certified mail, return receipt requested, and to all other counsel of record by U. S. Mail, postage prepaid, on this the _2?_ day of Xly__________, 1994. A(2.. Ul ERIC D. WEWERS DEFENDANTS APPLETON ET.ECTRIC COMPANY'S AND EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.'S ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION PAGE 63 F:\EDW\05300.INT THE STATE OF 4&SgIS COOK COUNTY OF KBWXKXB VERIFICATION S S S BEFORE ME, the undersigned notary public, on this day personally appeared Patrick Henry, known to me to be the person whose signature appears below and who, after being first by me duly sworn, on his oath deposed and said that he has read the attached Answers to Interrogatories, and that every statement contained therein is within his personal knowledge and is true and correct. PAT HENRY SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME on this the 26 July, 1994, to certify which witness my hand and seal of office. day of My Commission Expires: November 14, 1996 Notary Public In and/For The State of ILLINOIS XAnzttooe INhnrhtffeSttbeJKws County, to 18317* CawHhiiDi ** If VERIFICATION Solo Page EXHIBIT "A" DEFENDANTS' GENERAL LIST OF MEDICAL STATE-OF-THE-ART, ECONOMIC, LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS 1. Dr. Hans Weill, a Board Certified Pulmonary Specialist at Tulane Medical School, 1700 Perdido Street, New Orleans, Louisiana. 2. Dr. Harry B. Demopoulos, Pathologist, Health Maintenance Programs, Inc., P.O. Box 252, Valhalla, New York 10595. 3. Dr. H. Corwin Hinshaw (by deposition), retired Emeritus Professor of Medicine at the University of California School of Medicine, P.O. Box 546, Belvedere, California 94920. 4. Dr. Edward A. Gaensler, Boston University Medical Center, 80 East Concord Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02118. Drs. Weill, Demopoulos, Hinshaw, and Gaensler, if called to testify, are expected to provide testimony in the following areas: a. Anatomy and function of the respiratory and circulatory system; b. The nature of asbestos; c. The symptomatology, disease process and diag nosis of asbestos and cancer associated with the respiratory system, peritoneum and perito neal cavity; d. The nature and extent of medical and scientif ic knowledge regarding any association of obstructive pulmonary disease with asbestos fiber exposure; e. The effect of exposure to substances other than asbestos on the development and manifes tation of obstructive and restrictive condi tions and diseases of the respiratory system; f. Methods of diagnosis of various diseases particularly means of establishing the dif ferential diagnosis of alleged asbestos-relat ed diseases with other non-asbestos-related diseases; g. Incidence of lung cancer among individuals with asbestosis, compared with non-asbestotic DEFENDANTS* GENERAL LIST OF MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS Page 1 f:\iibc*tot\<icfxpcrt.wk ' asbestos workers and with the general popu lation; h. Cigarette smoking and its effect on the lung; i. The relationship of cigarette smoking to cancer of the lung and cancers of other sites with reference to epidemiological studies and physiologic effect; j. Difference between impairment and disability; k. Effect of asbestosis on disability and life expectancy; l. The lack of a relationship between presence of pleural plaques and a later development of any form of cancer; and m. The history of evolution and knowledge of asbestos related diseases. It is also expected that Drs. Weill, Demopoulos, Hinshaw, and Gaensler will testify that the medical community became aware that insulators with prolonged intense exposure might be at risk for asbestos related diseases in the late 1960's or early 1970's. Drs. Hinshaw, Weill, Demopoulos, and Gaensler will not testify con cerning the diagnosis or physical condition of these particular Plaintiffs. 5. Dr. R. Keith Wilson, Respiratory Consultants of Houston, 6535 Fannin, Fondren Building, Houston, Texas 77030. 6. Dr. Peter Heidbrink, a Board Certified Pulmonary Specialist at Southwest Pulmonary Associates, St. Paul Professional Building #2, 5959 Harry Hines Boulevard, Suite 711, Dallas, Texas 75235. 7. Dr. George Delclos, Pulmonary Section F907, Methodist Hospi tal, 6565 Fannin, Houston, Texas. 8. Dr. Gregory Foster, North Texas Pulmonary Associates, 375 Municipal Drive, Suite 140, Richardson, Texas 75080. 9. Dr. Scott R. Donaldson, North Texas Pulmonary Associates, 375 Municipal Drive, Suite 140, Richardson, Texas 75080. 10. Dr. Paul M. Stevens, a Board Certified Pulmonary Disease Specialist and Professor of Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine in Methodist Hospital in Houston, Texas. DEFENDANTS * GENERAL LIST OF MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS Page 2 f:\ubectM\delxpen.wit 11. Drs. Stevens, Wilson, Heidbrink, Delclos, Foster, and Donald son will testify concerning their examination and diagnosis of the physical condition of the particular Plaintiffs. It is expected that Drs. Wilson, Heidbrink, Stevens, Delclos and Foster will testify that the Plaintiffs do not have asbestosis and will further testify concerning the overall condition and the relationship of that condition, if any, to Plaintiff's exposure to asbestos. Each doctor will also testify concerning the following areas: a. Anatomy and function of the respiratory and circulatory systems; b. The nature of asbestos; c. The symptomatology, disease process and diag nosis of asbestos and cancer associated with the respiratory system, peritoneum and peri toneal cavity; d. The nature and extent of medical and scientif ic knowledge regarding any association of obstructive pulmonary disease with asbestos fiber exposure; e. The effect of exposure to substances other than asbestos on the development and manifes tation of obstructive and restrictive condi tions and diseases of the respiratory system; f. Methods of diagnosis of various diseases particularly means of establishing the dif ferential diagnosis of alleged asbestos-relat ed diseases with other government warnings, smoking, and some areas of state-of-the-art. g. Incidence of lung cancer among individuals with asbestos, compared with non-asbestotic asbestos workers and with the general popula tion; h. Cigarette smoking and its effect on the lung; i. The relationship of cigarette smoking to cancer of the lung and cancers of other sites with reference to epidemiological studies and physiologic effect; j. Difference between impairment and disability; DEFENDANTS * GENERAL LIST OP MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS Page 3 f:\MbccUx\4efxpert.wk k. Effect of asbestosis on disability and life expectancy; l. The lack of a relationship between presence of pleural plagues and a later development of any form of cancer. 12. Dr. Elliott Hinkes, a Board Certified Oncologist and Hematolo gist at 301 North Prairie Avenue, suite 311, Inglewood, California 90301. Dr. Hinkes will testify concerning the relationship of asbestos and smoking to the development of cancer. Dr. Hinkes will also testify concerning the incidence of lung cancer among individuals with asbestosis or exposure to asbestos-containing insulation products. 13. Dr. Keith Morgan, who will testify on state-of-the-art and the Saranac papers, to the effect that the Defendants could not have known and users were at risk until approximately the late 1960's. 14. Dr. Forde A. Mclver, Pathology Associates, P.A., 135 Rutledge Avenue, Charleston, South Carolina 29401. Dr. Mclver will testify on state-of-the-art and the Saranac papers, to the effect that the Defendants could not have known end users were at risk until approximately the late 1960's. 15. Dr. Joseph M. Miller, Box 365, New Hampton, New Hampshire. Dr. Miller will testify on state-of-the-art and the Saranac papers, to the effect that the Defendants could not have known end users were at risk until approximately the late 1960's. 16. Dr. Jesse Steinfield, who will testify concerning government warnings, smoking, and some areas of state-of-the art. 17. Dr. Stephen Ayres, Sanger Hall Room 1-014, Box 565, MCV Station, Richmond, Virginia 23298. Dr. Ayres will testify on state-of-the-art and the Saranac papers, to the effect that the Defendants could not have known end users were at risk until approximately the late 1960's. 18. Dr. Elvin Adams, General Conference of SDA's, 6840 Eastern Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20012. Dr. Adams will testify on asbestos-related diseases' effects, and in particular on smoking's effects. 19. Dr. `Thomas Wheeler, The Methodist Hospital, Department of Pathology, 6565 Fannin Street, Mail Station 205, Houston, Texas 77030. Dr. Wheeler will testify regarding general pathology and the pathology of the Plaintiff and/or Plain tiff's decedent. DEFENDANTS * GENERAL LIST OF MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY. AND DAMAGE EXPERTS f:\iibcttoi\dffapert.wit Page 4 20. Dr. Robert O'Neal, Route l. Box 168, Perkinston, Mississippi 39573. Dr. O'Neal will testify regarding general pathology and the pathology of the Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's dece dent. 21. Dr. Andrew Churg, The University of British Columbia, 2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, B. C. Canada V6T1W5, phone number 604-228-7111. Dr. Churg will testify regarding general pathology and the pathology of the Plaintiff and/or Plain tiff's decedent. 22. Dr. James Robert Shepherd, III, University of Texas Health Center at Tyler, Department of Radiology, P.O. Box 2003, Tyler, Texas 75710. Dr. Shepherd is a B reader and will testify regarding the radiographs of the Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's decedent. 23. Dr. Sam H. Cade, Jr., Radiology Department, Baylor University Medical Center, 3500 Gaston Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75242. Dr. Cade is a B reader and will testify regarding the radiographs of the Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's decedent. 24. Dr. Allan Shulkin, Medical City Dallas Hospital, 7777 Forest Lane, Suite 202, Dallas, Texas 75230. 25. Dr. Bobby F. Craft, Industrial Health, Inc., 640 East Wil mington Avenue, Salt Lake City, Utah 84106. Dr. Craft will testify that the medical community became aware that in sulators with prolonged intense exposure might be at risk for asbestos related diseases in the late 1960's or early 1970's. 26. Dr. Jeffrey S. Lee, Building 512, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112. Dr. Lee will testify that the medical community became aware that insulators with prolonged intense exposure might be at risk for asbestos related diseases in the late 1960's or early 1970's. 27. Dr. Oscar Auerbach, 158 Long Hill Drive, Short Hills, Jersey 07078. Dr. Auerbach will testify regarding pathology of the Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's decedent. New the 28. Dr. Donald Greenberg, The Methodist Hospital, Department of Pathology, 6565 Fanning, 2nd Floor, Houston, Texas 77030. Dr. Greenberg will testify regarding the pathology of the Plain tiff and/or Plaintiff's decedent. 29. Dr. Michael D. Henderson, 330 Rittiman Road, San Antonio, Texas 78209. Dr. Henderson will testify concerning the relationship of asbestos and smoking to the development of cancer. Dr. Henderson will also testify concerning the DEFENDANTS' GENERAL LIST OP MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS f:\ube4tM\defxpert.wit Page 5 incidence of lung cancer among individuals with asbestosis or exposure to asbestos-containing insulation products. 30. All physicians who have seen, examined, Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's decedent. and/or treated 31. Dr. John E. Craighead Chairman, Department of Pathology A249 Given Medical Building University of Vermont College of Medicine Burlington, Vermont 05401 32. A. Mitchell Polinsky, Ph.D. Stanford University Stanford, California 94305 33. Dr. Robert Jones Tulane Medical School 1700 Perdido Street New Orleans, Louisiana 34. Louis Calvin Solmon University of California in Los Angeles Los Angeles, California 35. Mr. Phillip Bettoli, GAF Corporation, 1361 Alps Road, Wayne, New Jersey 07470. Mr. Bettoli will testify concerning the utility of asbestos-containing products. 36. Charles Henry Drummond, Ceramic Engineering Ohio State University 2041 College Road Columbus, Ohio 43210 III 37. Defendants reserve the right to call as expert witnesses all physicians who have seen, examined, or treated plaintiff; reviewed plaintiff's medical records; and/or been designated as a witness by any other party to this action. 38. Defendants reserve the right to use any affidavit, deposition, answer to interrogatories, and/or answers to requests for admissions made by any party to this action. 39. Defendants incorporate by reference, the depositions listed in Defendants' Designation of Deposition Testimony. 40. Defendants reserve the right to call any witness who may be necessary for rebuttal testimony. DEFENDANTS' GENERAL LIST OF MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS Page 6 f:\ubeU\dcfxpeftwit 41. Jdmes E. Lockey, M.D., M.S., 3848 Chimney Hill Drive, Cincin nati, Ohio 45241. 42. Lyle Haack who will testify as to products manufactured by CertainTeed Corporation. 43. Dr. Phillip Cagle, Pathologist, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, Texas 77030, who will testify regarding general pathology and pathology of Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's decedent. 44. All other expert and factual witnesses listed by plaintiffs and defendants in this lawsuit. 45. William C. Schwingen, GAF Building Materials Corporation, 1361 Alps Road, Wayne, New Jersey, 07470. Mr. Schwingen is an employee of GAF Building Materials Corporation. He will be testifying regarding products manufactured by GAF or The Ruberoid Co., including the manufacturing process. His testimony may also include the topics referred to in connec tion with Mr. Bettoli. 46. Dr. H. Corwin Hinshaw, by deposition testimony in "William L. Nicar v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al", No. W-81-CA-8. 47. Dr. H. Corwin Hinshaw, be deposition testimony in "In Re: Related Asbestos Cases", No. C-83-6251-RFP, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; "In Re" Related Shipyard and Applicator Cases: Alameda County Asbestos Litigation", in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Alameda; Misc. No. 959, "In Re: Shipyard and Applicator Cases" (Clapper & Brayton) Consolidated for Discovery, in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Solano; and "In Re" San Francisco Asbestos Complex Litigation", in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the City and County of San Francisco. 48. Dr. H. Corwin Hinshaw, by deposition testimony in "Jimmie L. Vaughan v. Johns-Manville, et al", No. CA3-81-0070-F; "William L. Nicar v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al". No. W-81-CA008."Donald C. Lanier v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al", No. CA-80-1983; Jesse Cupit v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp, et al". No. CA-81-0082; "Jerry Lynn Coon v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al". No. CA-81-0077; "James L. Bush v. JohnsManville Corp., et al", No. Ca-81-0088; "Charles T. Burrow v. Johns-Manville Corp., et al". No. CA-80-1984; Ernest E. Adams v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al", No. CA-80-1982; "A. E. Jacks v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al". No. CA-80-1981; "Clinton Wayne Barlow v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al", DEFENDANTS * GENERAL LIST OF MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS Page 7 f:\asbeftM\defcpert.wit No. CA-80-1985; and "Willard Scott, Jr. v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., et al", No. CA-81-0081. 49. Dr. Hans Weill, by deposition testimony in "Ernest Howell v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc., et al", No. M-80-169-CA. 50. John Sartain is an economist consultant and may testify regarding any economic loss incurred. 51. William Lee Eschenbacher, Laboratory, The Methodist Houston, Texas 77030. M.D., F988, Pulmonary Function Hospital, 6565 Fannin, Street, 52. Dr. Joseph H. Bates 5 Glenridge Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 53. Dr. Russell D. Sherwin 2011 Zonal Avenue, HMR-201 Los Angeles, California 90033-1054 54. Dr. Dala R. Jarolim 12305 S. 14th Street Jenks, Oklahoma 74037-4903 55. Any prior deposition or trial testimony of any witness called by any other party either live or by deposition. 56. Any prior deposition or trial testimony of any physician who has treated, examined, or been consulted regarding the Plaintiff. 57. Any deposition or custodian of records concerning the Plain tiff. 58. Any prior deposition or trial testimony of any Plaintiff represented by Plaintiff's attorney herein. 59. Any deposition taken by any party in this case. DEFENDANTS * GENERAL LIST OP MEDICAL. STATE-OF-THE-ART. ECONOMIC. LIABILITY AND DAMAGE EXPERTS f:Wbcto\dcfXpert,wk Page 8