Document dQEGg1NKL1y5jgr9BzRQ4KMge

FILE NAME: Hopeman Brothers (HB) DATE: 1989 DOC#: HB041 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Amended Answers to Interrogatories IN RE: PERSONAL INJURY ASBESTOS CASES * IN THE * CIRCUIT COURT * FOR * BALTIMORE CITY * CT-5 Shipyard Cases * * Case No. 87-048505 *************************************************************** AMENDED ANSWERS OF HOPEMAN BROTHERS, INC. TO PLAINTIFFS'^ MASTER SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS. Now comes Hoperaan Brothers, Inc., by its attorneys, Robert J. Lynott, Patricia O'Donnell, Ronald L. Mattie, and MOORE, LIBOWITZ & THOMAS, and hereby amends its Answers to Plaintiffs' Master Set of Interrogatories to All Defendants. References to answers herein are references to the amended master answers in this document. GENERAL OBJECTIONS LAW O FFICES MOORE, LIBOWITZ a THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 1. The information supplied in these Answers is not based solely on the knowledge of the executing party but includes t e knowledge of the party, '"agents, representatives, and attorneys unless privileged. ... 2. The word usage and sentence structure may be that of the attorney assisting in the preparation of these Answers and thus does not necessarily purport to be the precise language of the executing party. 3. Def e n d a n t objects g e n e r a l l y to Plaintiffs' use throughout these Interrogatories of the terms "asbestos products", "Defendant's asbestos products", and Defendant s asbestos-containing products". These are terms susceptible to more than one meaning and include within their scope materials not relevant to this litigation. 4. Defendant objects to the definitions of the terms lefendant" , "you" or " y o u r " on the grounds that such ifinitions seek information from persons over which Defenda is no control or to whom it has no access and Defendant irther objects on the ground that this definition requires a irticular Defendant to make a determination as to w >rsons or firms purported to act on its behalf.. LAW O FFICES MOORE. UBOW1TZ fit THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLANO 21201-4303 5. D e f e n d a n t objects to the terms "which you have knowledge of" or "your knowledge" for the reasons set out previously in the above general objection. 6. Defendant objects generally to the use of the phrase "subsidiary, predecessor, or affiliate corporation", inasmuch as these terms are subject to a variety of meanings and the Plaintiffs have not assigned which definition they intend to use for these terms. 7. Defendant objects to these Interrogatories on the grounds that they are often vague, ambiguous, subject to j various interpretations, and that they seek information which j is not relevant and/or not reasonably calculated to lead to , discovery of admissible evident. j 8. Defendant objects to Plaintiffs' grouping of all : Defendants together in Master Interrogatories which are ; oppressive and overbroad. ` 9. This Defendant states that it is not now and never has | been engaged in the business of mining, processing, or . manufacturing asbestos products, and accordingly is not knowledgeable of the composition of products allegedly containing asbestos. This Defendant has installed a variety of products, many of which may or may not have contained asbestos. Accordingly, these answers to these Interrogatories contain information only as to those products known by this Defendant to have contained asbestos. 10. Defendant objects to these Interrogatories on the grounds that there often is no limitation as to time period or relevant geographical area. Defendant limits its response to the relevant geographical area of Plaintiffs' claims. 11. Defendant objects to these Interrogatories on the grounds that they seek discovery in violation of the workproduct doctrine and attorney-client privilege and seek responses on behalf of other persons or entities. 12. D e f e n d a n t 's i n v e s t i g a t i o n is continuing and it reserves the right to amend or supplement these Interrogatories in the event that it acquires additional information which is responsive to these Interrogatories. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT Hopeman Brothers, Inc. objects to Plaintiffs' instructions and d e f i n i t i o n s as over b r o a d and vague. Some of the information sought is also excessively burdensome to collect since it involves a large number of people either deceased, 2 retired, or no longer employed by Hopeman. In addition, to the extent that the interrogatories seek information not related to the time period when it is claimed that the Plaintiffs were employed. H o p e m a n Brothers, Inc. objects to such interrogatories since the information sought by Plaintiffs is not relevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit, nor is it reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.'s answers^, unless otherwise indicated, are therefore limited to the time period during which Hopeman Brothers, Inc. installed products containing asbestos. Hopeman Brothers, Inc. intends that its objections apply to all interrogatories, and does not intend to waive its objections by using its best efforts in providing answers to certain interrogatories. Hopeman Brothers, Inc.'s answers are as accurate as they may be as of the date of the answers to these interrogatories. * Hopeman Brothers, Inc. will continue its i n v e s t i g a t i o n and u p d a t e its answers if additional information becomes available. PART T - fiRNKRAT, TNTKRROGATORIES interrogatory each such person is responsible. atjswrr t o INTERROGATORY NO.__Lt-Defendant objects to this LAW O FFICES ft THOMAS A pr o fessio n a l a sso cia tio n 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 that the following corporate officers assisted in answering these interrogatories: 3 LAW O FFICES MOORE. UBOWITZ a THOMAS * PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLANO 2 1 2 0 1 .4 3 0 3 John E. Baker, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., 435 Essex Avenue, P.0. Box 820, Waynesboro, VA 22980; 1649 Wickham Dr., #92, Waynesboro, VA 22980; Vice-President and Secretary of Hopeman Brothers, Inc. INTERROGATORY N O . 2; Identify each "document" that was examined, reviewed, and/or used in answering each interrogatory, specify the interrogatory and identify the present custodian of each document. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is undvuly burdensome and impossible to answer as phrased. In addition, this question invades privileged work product of Defendant's counsel and the attorney-client privilege. INTERROGATORY N O . 3: State whether you are a corporation. If so, state: your corporate name: state of incorporation; date of incorporation; address of principal place of business; address(es) of any other place of business; whether, if you are a "foreign corporation" as d e f i n e d in Maryland General Corporation Law Sec. 1-101(1), you are now or have ever been r e g i s t e r e d or q u a l i f i e d to do b u s i n e s s in the State of Maryland; and the corporate name, state of incorporation and date of incorporation1' of any subsidiary, predecessor or affiliate corporation. . ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY n o . 3: Hopeman Brothers, Inc. was incorporated September 15, 1930, in the state of Delaware. Its principal place of business was New York City until 1976, when it moved to Waynesboro, VA. Hopeman Brothers, Inc. was certified to transact business in the State of Maryland in 1937. INTERROGATORY N O . 4: have existed. Identify all prior names by which you ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4: None. INTERROGATORY N O . 5: If you have divisions which have ever mined, manufactured, produced, fabricated, imported,_converted, compounded, processed, sold, merchandised, supplied, 4 distributed and/or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce asbestos products, identify each such division and state the name, addresses and job titles of each person who supervised each division, specifying the applicable time periods. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5; Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that it is overly burdensome in requesting Defendant to state information concerning any asbestos products it may have " . . . distributed . . . or placed in the stream of commerce." Plaintiffs improperly seek j information which is not limited with respect to time period v , 1 and job location and which is, therefore, unduly broad. j INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Have you controlled, purchased or in any j way acquired any interest in any corporation or business entity ; which has mined, manufactured, processed, produced, fabricated, ' imported, converted, compounded, processed, sold, merchandised, ; supplied, distributed, and/or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce asbestos products. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Defendant objects. See objections stated in Answer No. 5. INTERROGATORY N O . 7: If^ your Answer to Interrogatory No. 6 is in the affirmative, identify and attach copies of all documents related thereto and state: . (A) The name(s), including prior name(s), and the business a d dress (es) of any and all such corporation(s) or business entity(ies); : (B) The date(s) on which you first controlled, purchased or acquired said interest; , (C) The manner in which you acquired said interest, ; i.e., cash purchase, merger, consolidation, exchange or sale of ; assets, etcetera; i (D) The percentage of assets, ownership and/or ; control acquired by you; ; (E) Whet h e r the c o r p o r a t i o n (s ) or business entity(ies) acquired by you continued to exist following the | acquisition and, if not, the date on which its existence ; ceased. j (F) The nature of and/or amount of consideration ! paid by you for said interest; ! (G) The terms and conditions of any contracts or , LAW O FFICES agreements by and between you and such corporation (s ) or [ MOORE, LIBOWITZ business entity(ies), including, but not limited to, the terms i THOMAS and conditions .relating to the transfer of liabilities for j A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION obligations of such corporations(s) or business entity(ies) ; j FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 5 2 2 0 1 -4 S 0 3 (H) Whether you continued the manufacture, sale and/or distribution of such corporation's or business entity's asbestos or asbestos-containing products and, of so, whether you used the same product name(s) in so doing; and (I) Whether there was an identity of name, officers, directors, personnel, property, suppliers, distribution outlets and/or clients between you and such corporation(s) or business entity(ies). ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY n o . 7: Defendant objects. See objections stated in Answer No. 5. INTERROGATORY N O . 8: If you have directly or indirectly mined ; manufactured, produced, fabricated, imported, converted, : compounded, processed, sold, merchandised, supplied, installed, i distributed, and/or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce , asbestos or asbestos-containing products state as to each such ! product, indicating separately those products dealt with by j you, your predecessor(s) in interest, your subsidiary(ies), and : your affiliate(s), if any, the following: j (A) Brand name, trade-name, and/or trade-mark; ' (B) The generic name or identity; (C) Description, including size, shape, color and composition, i.e. solid, powder or other form; (D) Chemical and physical composition, including, but not limited to, the percentage of asbestos by weight and . volume; ' (E) Type of asbestos, i.e. chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite, actinolite, anthophyllite, or tremolite, indicating the percentage of each such asbestos fiber by weight and volume; .. (F) Intended marketable use; (G) Dates during which each asbestos product was mined, manufactured, produced, fabricated, imported, converted, compounded, processed, sold, merchandised, supplied, distributed, installed, bought and/or sold, and/or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce. ' ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY n o . 8: Defendant objects to this ! I n t e r r o g a t o r y on the basis that it is overly broad and j b u r d e n s o m e in asking D e f e n d a n t to state the requested information concerning any products containing asbestos it may have " . . . distributed . . . or placed in the stream of LAW O FFICES MOORE, LIBOWIT2 a THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL. ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 commerce". A Plaintiff may be entitled to information concerning a specific time period and job location .relevant to 6 that Plaintiff, but the Interrogatory is not so limited, and therefore, improper. ! Without waiving its objection, Hopeman Brothers, Inc. installed, where specified, Marinite, Marine Veneer and asbestos paper. Marinite panels, gray solid sheets measuring 4' x 8', were manufactured by Johns-Manville, and contained 33% amosite or 55-60% chrysotile asbestos by weight. Marine Veneer j panels, white solid sheets, generally measuring 4' x 4', were manufactured by Johns-Manville. In very limited amounts, an asbestos paper, white, 301b. weight, manufactured generally by Johns-Manville and containing 95% chrysotile asbestos by weight, was used as an acoustical sound transmission retardant. On rare occasions, comparable products of Unarco, U.S. Plywood and Phillip Carey were purchased for installation, although j Defendant is unsure as to whether or not such products were used in Maryland. To the extent that they exist, some * II documents relevant to the installation of such products are j located at the offices of Hopeman Brothers, Inc. in Waynesboro, ; II VA. | LAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 2 1 2 0 1 .4 3 0 3 INTERROGATORY N O . 9: State whether you presently mine, manufacture, produce, fabricate, import, convert, compound, process, sell, merchandise, supply distribute, and/or otherwise place in the stream of commerce any asbestos product(s) listed in your Answer to the preceding interrogatory. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9: See Answer No. 5. However, without waiving its objection. Defendant states that it does not presently install products containing asbestos. i n t e r r o g a t o r y n o . IQ: Identify each -individual who participated in the design and preparation of manufacturing 7 LAW OFFICES MOORE, LIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR SOO N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARVLAND 2 l2 O t-4 3 0 9 specifications for each asbestos product identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 8. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 11: State whether any written memoranda, specifications, blueprints or other written materials of any kind or c h a r a c t e r now exist relating to the design and preparation of the asbestos products identified in you Answer to Interrogatory No. 8. If so, identify: (A) Each such written material or document; and (B) The custodian, identity and location of each such written material or document. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Identify, by location and product, each plant of yours in which the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 8 have been manufactured and/or assembled and the dates said plants have been in operation. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12: See Answer No. 5, as well as Answer N o . 8. INTERROGATORY NO. 13: If you have discontinued mining, 1 manufacturing, producing, fabricating, importing, converting, compounding, processing, selling', merchandising, supplying, distributing and/or otherwise placing in the stream of commerce ' any asbestos products listed in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 8, identify the products discontinued, give the date of discontinuance and specify the reason(s) for such . discontinuance. 1 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Defendant objects to this 1 I I n t e r r o g a t o r y on the basis that it is overly broad and 1 ! burdensome in asking Defendant to state the requested j information concerning any asbestos products it may have j i placed "in the stream of commerce". Without waiving its : objection, Defendant was a ship joiner, end-user, which j ' I installed products. ' INTERROGATORY N O . 14: If you have done so, when did you first | determine that any other material could be used in place of asbestos for high-temperature insulation or any other use to or for which asbestos has been applied. If you have, in fact, substituted other material(s) for asbestos in your product(s), 8 CAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201*4303 substituted other material(s) for asbestos in your product(s), then state: (A) The identity of such substituted material(s); (B) W h e n the product(s) with such substituted material(s) was first marketed; and (C) The trade-name (s) and brand name(s) of the product(s) marketed with such substituted material(s). ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14: See Answer to Interrogatory No. 13. Without waiving its objection. Defendant states that it never made such determinations as these determinations were made by the federal government and the manufacturers of such products. ' INTERROGATORY NO. 15: State whether you have ever made any changes, alterations or modifications (hereinafter referred to as "change"), to your asbestos products from 1930 to the present. If so, state: (A) The identity, by brand, name and trade-name, of each such product; . (B) The date(s) each such product was changed or altered; (C) The m a n n e r in w h i c h each such product was changed or altered, including, but not limited to, any changes in the asbestos content or chemical composition of each such product; (D) The reason for each change or alteration; (E) The identity of the person(s) responsible for instituting each change or alteration; a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15: See Answer No. 5, as well as Answer No. 8. INTERROGATORY NO. 16: Do you contend that any of the asbestos products listed in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 8 require change or modification before they may be used? If so, specify what change or modification is required for each such product. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 16: Products containing asbestos were installed by Hopeman Brothers, Inc. in performing the joiner work according to the specifications or ship owner's instructions. Laminate was applied to some of the Marinite before use. During its performance of the joiner work, Hopeman Brothers, Inc. sized material to fit various configurations and 9 drilled and screwed to appropriate framing members. See Answer to Interrogatory No. 8. INTERROGATORY NO. 17: Identify all patents issued, or any applications made therefore, for any asbestos product listed in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 8. Specify the number of each patent, the date(s) of application, issuance and renewal, if applicable, to whom each patent was issued and the product(s) for which each patent was issued. A N S W E R TO I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 17: Not applicable. This Defendant was an installer of products. INTERROGATORY NO. 18: Identify all trade-marks registered for any products listed in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 8. Specify the number and date of registration, the term thereof, the date(s) of renewal, if applicable, by whom each trade-mark was registered and the product(s) for which each trade-mark was registered. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18: See Answer 17. INTERROGATORY N O . 19 : State whether you have installed, distributed or sold any asbestos or asbestos-containing : products which were mined, manufactured, produced, fabricated, ; imported, converted, compounded, processed, sold, merchandised, : .supplied and/or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce by j persons and/or business entities other than you or your 1 predecessor(s) in interest or subsidiary(ies), if any. If so, ' state: " I (A) The identity of each such person and/or business j entity whose asbestos products you sold, installed, or ; distributed on a product-by-product basis; j (B) The terms of all assignments, agreements, ; licenses and other arrangements which relate to same, and identify and attach copies of all such documents; \ (C) As to each product, the brand name, trade-name and/or trademark adopted and used by the source from which you obtained said product for installation, distribution or sale; (D) As to each product, the brand name, trade-name and/or trademark adopted and used by you for purposes of ; distribution, installation or sale of said product; j (E) The gene r i c name or i d e n t i t y of each such j product; ] (F) The dates during w h i c h you distributed, installed or sold each such product; (G) As to ea c h such product, a description, including size, shape, color, composition, i.e. solid, powder LAW O FFICES MOORE, L1BOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION or other form; (H) As to each such product, the type of asbestos and the percentage o asbestos, by weight and volume ; (I) As to each such product, its intended marketable FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET 10 BALTIM ORE, MARYLANO 21201-4303 LAW OFFICES MOORE, UBOWITZ fik T H O M A S A PROFE3SIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201*4303 use; (J) The identity of each person and/or business entity in the State of Maryland to whom or to which you sold, installed or distributed each such product; (K) The identity of each contractor, subcontractor, installer or other business in the State of Maryland which ultimately installed, applied or used each such product; and (L) Th.e custodian,, identity and location of each document which refers to or contains information relevant to such sale, installation or distribution. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19: See objection stated in Answer No. 8. Without waiving its objection, Hopeman Brothers, Inc. installed, where specified, Marinite, Marine Veneer and \ asbestos paper. Marinite panels, gray solid sheets measuring 4' x 8', were manufactured by Johns-Manville, and contained 33% amosite or 55-60% chrysotile asbestos by weight. Marine Veneer panels, white solid sheets, generally measuring 4' x 4', were manufactured by Johns-Manville. In very limited amounts, an asbestos paper, white, 301b. weight, manufactured generally by Johns-Manville and containing 95% chrysotile asbestos by weight, was used as an'acoustical sound transmission retardant. On rare occasions, comparable products of Unarco, U.S. Plywood and Phillip Carey were purchased for installation, although Defendant is unsure as to whether or not such products were used in Maryland. To the extent that they exist, some documents relevant to the installation of such products are located at the offices of Hopeman Brothers, Inc. in Waynesboro, VA. INTERROGATORY N O . 20: Identify the distributors of your asbestos products at any time during the period from 1930 to the present and attach copies of all documents relating to said distributors. For each distributor, indicate; (A) The terms of all assignments, agreemen licenses- and other arrangements by and between you and said distributor; . ' 11 LAW O FFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLANO 2 1 2 0 1 .4 3 0 3 (B) W h e t h e r the d i s t r i b u t i o n relationship was exclusive; (C) The year or years in which the distribution relationship was in effect; (D) The identity of your asbestos products which the distributor was authorized to and did distribute; and _ (E) The q u a n t i t y of your asbestos products distributed by the distributor on a year--by-year and product-by-product basis. * ANSWER TQ_ INTERROGATORY N O . 20: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that it is overly burdensome. This Interrogatory seeks information unrelated to the specific work locations within this Court's jurisdiction and unrelated to the dates when Plaintiffs were employed at particular work site locations. To this extent, the information sought is not relevant to the subject matter of this litigation and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving its objection, Hopeman Brothers, Inc. had no distributors. INTERROGATORY NO. 21: State whether you have ever sold, distributed or otherwise furnished any of your asbestos products to any other person and/or business entity for resale, installation or redistribution at any time from 1930 to the present. If so, state; entity; (A) The identity of each such person and/or business (B) The brand name, trade-name and/or trademark adopted and used by you for each such product; (C) The brand name, trade-name and/or trademark adopted and used by each such person and/or business entity for each such product; (D) The generic name or identity of each such product; t i (E) The year(s) in which each such product was sold, distributed or otherwise furnished to each such person and/or business entity, and for each year, the quantity of each products sold, distributed or otherwise furnished; (F) The intended m a r k e t a b l e use for each such product ; (G) Whether each such product was intended to be used, resold, installed or distributed by such other person and/or business entity in the same or substantially the same condition as it was when shipped or delivered by you; and 12 (H) The custodian, identity and location of documents pertaining to agreements for the resale, distribution, or furnishing of your asbestos products to each other person and/or business entity. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 21: Hopeman Brothers, Inc. was not in the business of selling or distributing products containing asbestos. Hopeman Brothers, Inc. was a ship joiner which installed products. INTERROGATORY NO. 22: State the following with respect to the ! i packages and containers in which you sold, distributed or ! otherwise furnished each of the asbestos products described in j your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19'on a year-by-year ; and product-by-product basis: ! (A) A description of the package or container in ! which each product was sold, distributed or otherwise j furnished, including composition, size, shape and color; i (B) A d e s c r i p t i o n of the m a r k i n g s or pri n t e d ' material that appeared on each package or container, indicating . ; the size and color of the same. ' | (C) A d e s c r i p t i o n of any logo or other design j appearing on the package or container; , (D) A verbatim description of any caution or warning notice appearing on the package or container, setting forth the , year(s) in which each such notice appeared on each such product; and i (E) A verbatim description of any instructions appearing on the package or container. ' ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 22: Defendant reasonably relied : upon the manufacturers, to provide products as defined in the , ship's specifications. LAW OFFICES MORE. LIBW IT2 THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 INTERROGATORY NO. 23: If your answer to Interrogatory No. 22 reflects that any changes were made to the packages and containers in which you sold, distributed or otherwise furnished each of the asbestos products described in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19, indicate as to each such package or container: (A) The nature of each such change, e.g., changes in composition, size, shape and color, and/or changes regarding the placement, modification or removal of any color, logo, design, name, word, number, instruction, warning or other marking on the container; (B) The date on w h i c h yo u d e c i d e d to make the change ; (C) The date the container was in fact, changed; (D) The reason for the change; 13 LAW O FFICES MOORE. U 80W ITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N CHARLES STREET ALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201*4303 (E) The identity of each present or former employee, officer, representative or agent of yours at any time from 1930 to the present with knowledge or information regarding your decision to change any aspect of the package or container; and (F) The custodian, location and identity of each document in your custody, control or possession which contains information relevant to your decision to change any aspect of the package or container. j ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 23: Not applicable. j INTERROGATORY N O . 24 : For each asbestos product identified in j your A n s w e r to Interr o g a t o r y Nos. 8 and 19, as being j manufactured, sold, distributed, installed or otherwise ; furnished by you, state: ; (A) Whether you have actual packages or containers ' or photographs of packages or containers in which said products ; were sold, d i s t r i b u t e d or o t h e r w i s e f urnished which is , representative of the appearance of the product and/or ; packaging during the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, respectively; and ! (B) The identity of the custodian of said packages > or containers or photographs thereof. 1 A N S W E R TO I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 24: To the best of its knowledge. Defendant states that it knows of none. . INTERROGATORY NO. 25: State whether you prepared or published any catalogues, brochures, or other documents describing products containing asbestos or asbestos components. If so, identify each such catalogue, brochure or other document and the custodian thereof. ' ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 29; None. I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 26: Identify ea c h pres e n t or former employee, officer, agent or representative of yours, who directed, handled, solicited, supervised, promoted or otherwise participated in the sale, supply, distribution, delivery, installation or removal in Maryland, at any time, from 1930 to the present time, of any asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 26: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as unduly burdensome and overly broad. INTERROGATORY NO. 27: For each person identified in your A n s w e r to I n t e r r o g a t o r y No. 26 wh o p a r t i c i p a t e d in the . advertising in Maryland of any asbestos products identified in Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 at any time from 19 30 to the ! present, state: I (A) His or her duties, responsibilities inclusive years of employment; * I 14 inclusive years of employment; (B) promoted and solicited. The identity of each product offered, marke ANSWER__INTERROGATORY NO, 27: None. LAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ et TH O M A S A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 INTERROGATORY NO. 28: Describe your corporate structure and policy concerning the subject of employee safety in the design, development, manufacture,.testing and use of asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 from 1930 to the present. In your Answer to this Interrogatory, identify each present or former corporate department, division, subdivision or other group responsible for the above-described activities and, with respect to each, identify the name, title, duties, responsibilities, and current or last known business and residential address of the highest supervisory -employee with knowledge of any of those activities during any time from 1930 to the present. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO, 28: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome, oppressive, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. without waiving its objection, Defendant states that it was an end user of products manufactured by other companies. INTERROGATORY NO. 29: Describe your corporate structure concerning the subject of research and development of asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 from 1930 to the present. In your Answer to this Interrogatory, identify each present or former corporate department, division, subdivision or other group responsible for any of these activities and, with respect to each, identify the name, title, duties, responsibilities, and current or last j known b u s iness and residential address of the highest supervisory employee during any time form 1930 to the present. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO: 29 See Answer 28. INTERROGATORY NO. 30: Describe your corporate structure concerning medical directors, industrial hygienists or consultants in these fields from 1930 to the present. In your Answer to this Interrogatory, identify the name, title, duties, responsibilities, period of employment, to whom the individual reported, and the current or last known business and residential address of each medical director, industrial hygienist or consultant of yours, or of your predecessor(s) in interest or subsidiary(ies), if any. ' 15 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 30: None. INTERROGATORY N O . 31: Identify any medical examination program offered or sponsored by you or your insurance carrier, from 1930 to the present, for employees handling or otherwise exposed to asbestos and/or asbestos products. with respect to each such program, indicating applicable time periods, state: (A) The manner of communicating with employees about such program; * (B) Whether examination was optional or mandatory and, if the latter, how frequently such examination was required; (C) What percentage of employees p ermitted to undergo such examination actually participated; (D) What percentage of employees who underwent such medical e x a m i n a t i o n were found to have pneumoconiosis, asbestosis, mesothelioma, lung cancer or other cancers; and (E) With respect to the employees referred to in your Answer to Part (D) of this Interrogatory, what percentage of these employees were paid disability, and/or worker's compensation benefits and for what percentage of employees were medical expenses paid for purposes of treatment of such condition. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 31: Defendant began such a medical examination program in 1972, which program was mandatory for all employees. Defendant is unaware of claims before it terminated work at the shipyard. LAW O FFICES MOORE, UIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLANO 21201-4305 INTERROGATORY NO. 32: State whether you or anyone on your behalf ever conducted, engaged in or participated in any tests, studies and/or research, (hereinafter referred to as "study", concerning the human health consequences of persons coming in contact with and/or inhaling and or ingesting asbestos fibers or asbestos dust, during the manufacture and/or use of asbestos products. If so, identify: (A) What tests "studies" and/or research were done; (B) The date or time period when the "studies" were done ; (C) The individuals who ordered and supervised the tests, "studies" and/or research; (D) The individuals or groups engaged in or who participated in the test "study" and/or research; (E) The substance of any recommendations and/or suggestions given as a result of the test studies and/or research. State when, by whom and to whom said recommendations were made, including the addresses of these individuals; (F) All written documents including, but not limited to, reports, memoranda, specifications and correspondence which refer, relate or p e r t a i n to s aid tests, "studies" and/or research; and 16 J* (G) The present custodian of the written docu identified in your Answer to Part (F) of this Interrogatory; ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 32; None. INTERROGATORY N O . 33: State whether any of the medical directors, industrial hygienists or consultants in the fields identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 30 ever made any recommendations and/or suggestions to you pertaining to' the risks or hazards to persons involved in the manufacture or use of asbestos products. If so, identify; (A) The date when said recommendations an suggestions were made; l1 (B) The individual to whom said recommendations |i and/or suggestions were made; |! (C) The individual who made said recommendations ji and/or suggestions; ' J;j (D) The suggestions; and substance of the recommendations and/or ; (E) What actions, if any, were taken by you as a i result of said recommendations and/or suggestions. i ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 33: Not applicable. !! |i INTERROGATORY NO. 34: State whether you have ever conducted or ! directed any studies to determine the amount of asbestos dust in your asbestos product manufacturing facilities. If so, identify: (A) The date of each such study; ! (B) The individual or group conducting each such | study; ,, ji (C) The result or conclusion of each such study; to |j each such study; and , i (D) The present c u s t o d i a n of all documents identified in your Answer to Part (D) of this Interrogatory. A N S W E R TO I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 34: Not applicable. ! | Defendant was an installer of products. This INTERROGATORY NO. 35: State whether any written memoranda, specification, blueprints or other written materials of any kind or character exist relating to any testing of the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19. If so, identify: (A) Each such written material or document; and (B) The custodian, identity and location of each such written material or document. LAW O FFICES MOORE. UBOWiTZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL. ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4305 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 35: No. INTERROGATORY N O . 36: State whether, after you released to the public any of the asbestos products identified in' your Answer 17 to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19, you ever conducted or directed any tests thereon to determine potential health hazards involved in the use of the materials contained therein. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 36: This Defendant was an end user of products manufactured by others. INTERROGATORY NO. 37: State whether, prior to 1970, you ever had any labor inspectors or persons from your company go to job sites or other areas where your asbestos products were being used or installed to make a dust level count. If so, indicate when such a practice or procedure began, the purpose of the practice or procedure and what action, if any was taken by you in response to the findings made as a result of said practice or procedure. j * ` I! ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 37: No. j INTERROGATORY NO. 38: State whether you ever conducted or 1 directed, any studies designed to learn how to minimize or j eliminate the inhalation and ingestion of asbestos dust and j fibers by those who use your asbestos products or are exposed ; to asbestos dust or fibers therefrom. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 38: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that it fails to define use of the term "studies" and the Interrogatory is therefore not capable of being answered without speculation. i i I INTERROGATORY NO. 39: Including, but not limited to the ' following list, please identify all trade organizations, associations or other entities to which you belong or belonged. Said organizations, etcetera, include, at a minimum, the following: LAW O FFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201*4305 Asbestos Textile Institute (ATI) Industrial Hygiene Foundation and/or Industrial Health Foundation (IHF) Mineral Wool Institute Industrial Mineral Insulation Manufacturers Institute Magnesia Silica Insulation Manufacturers Association National Insulation Manufacturers Association (NIMA) Thermal Insulation Manufacturers Association (TIMA) Asbestos Information Association (AIA) Quebec Asbestos Mining Association (QAMA) National Safety Counsel ' 18 LAW O FFICES MOORE, LIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLANO 212 01.4303 Asbestos Cement Producers Association Refractories Institute ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 39: Defendant is a member of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, the Shipbuilders' Council of America, and the American Society for Testing and Materials. Defendant has not ever been a member of the above-referenced organizations. INTERROGATORY N O . 40: For each trade organization, association or other entity identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 39, state: (A) Dates of membership ' (B) Type of membership, i.e., regular or associate; (C) The dates and type of meetings you attended and the identity of the individuals who attended such meetings on your behalf; (D) The identity, title, duties and responsibilities of any individual who held an elected, appointed or self- designated position within said organization; (E) The nam e s of any p u b l i c a t i o n s or w r i t t e n materials distributed by or on behalf of said organization; and (F) The identity of the present custodian of all written materials, notes, summaries, minutes or transcripts relating to the transactions and proceedings of said organization ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO.40: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is overly broad, vague, burdensome in its scope, and lacking in relevance to the particularities of the case at bar. i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 41: For each trade organization, association or other entity identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 39, identify by date and subject matter, all studies, tests, research, recommendations, suggestions, seminars, symposia and/or speeches conducted or made which concerned, discussed, addressed or dealt with the actual, alleged or possible health hazards associated with exposure to asbestos. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 41: Defendant is unaware of any such studies, tests, research, recommendations, suggestions, seminars, symposia or speeches which may have concerned the 19 health hazards associated with exposure to asbestos. INTERROGATORY NO. 42: With respect to each study, test, research project recommendation, suggestion, seminar, symposium or speech identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 41, identify: (A) The individuals or groups involved therein; (B) The date(s) thereof; * (C) The complete results thereof; (D) The recommendations, if any, which were made as a result thereof; and (E) The custodian, identity and location of each document which represents, refers to or contains information relating thereto. j | I ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 42: Not applicable. i INTERROGATORY NO. 43: Describe each action taken by you as a \ \ result of each study, test, research project, recommendation, ! | suggestion, seminar, symposium and/or speech identified in your | ! Answer to Interrogatory No. 41. In your Answer to this ! Interrogatory, state the date of each action and the identity ; of the individual(s) who initiated said action. : ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 43: Not applicable. . INTERROGATORY NO. 44: State whether you directed, sponsored, financed, participated in or received the results of any "studies" and/or tests performed by the Saranac Laboratory of the Trudeau foundation concerning the human health consequences of exposure to asbestos.' . ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 44: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 45: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 44 is in the affirmative, identify: J (A) All documents in your possession or control ! which summarize or explain the results of said studies or tests; (B) All communications, oral or written, between you and Saranac Laboratory personnel, including but not limited to Gerrit W. Schepers, M.D.; j (C) All documents relating to Saranac Laboratory : studies or test which were received or submitted by you, either j directly or indirectly through predecessor(s) in interest, ; s u b s i d i a r y (i e s ) or a f f i l i a t e (s ), if any, through oth e r j companies, or through any trade associations, organizations or ! entities; (D) All recommendations or findings of such studies j LAW OFFICES MOORE. LBOW1TZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION in relation to: (i) (ii) ' Adequacy or inadequacy of the threshold limit values; . the substitution of materials for FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET 20 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201-4303 asbestos; and (E) The custodian and/or communications identified in Interrogatory. and location of all docum your Answer to this ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 45: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 46: State the amount of money spent or contributed by you annually from 19 30 to the present *for research of the relationship between exposure to asbestos dusts, fibers and/or products and any pulmonary pathology and identify each person or organization to whom the expenditure or contribution was made. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY n o . 46: This Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it collaterally requests information obtained in anticipation of litigation. Without waiving this objection. Defendant is unaware as to any such moneys spent. INTERROGATORY NO. 47: State whether you have ever maintained a l i b r a r y (or libraries) whi c h c o n t a i n s books, articles, periodicals, journals and/or reference materials that relate to the subjects of asbestos, industrial hygiene, medicine, safety, occupational disease and/or engineering. If so, state; (A) The date each such library was established; (B) The location of each such library; (C) The identity of each librarian or other person in charge of the operation and materials of each such library since 1930; b (D) All journals subscribed to by you concerning asbestos, industrial hygiene, medicine, safety and/or engineering, occupational diseases; (E) The title, publisher and date of subscription to or acquisition of each book, periodical, journal and/or article for each such library dealing with asbestos; and (F) The title, author, publisher, date and dates of acquisition of each such article and book for each such library. ANSWER t o INTERROGATORY n o . 47: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that it is overbroad and is not limited to issues related to this litigation. INTERROGATORY N O . 48: State whether any of the co-defendants in asbestos litigation have ever furnished you with any information as to the state of the medical knowledge at any time regarding the relationship between exposure to asbestos dusts, fibers and/or products and the contracting of diseases, including asbestosis, pneumoconiosis, mesothelioma,'lung cancer 21 and other cancers. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 48: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory to the extent that it seeks counsel's work product that might have been obtained in defense of this litigation. Otherwise, the Defendant is unaware of such information being provided, pre-litigation. INTERROGATORY NO. 49: If your Answer is in the affirmative, please identify by stating the following: (A) How the information was furnished; (B) Who furnished said information; (C) When said information was given to you; and (D) The substance of said information. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 49: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY n o . 50: State whether, at any time since 19 30, you have interchanged, exchanged or communicated, the results of research, tests, studies or experiments regarding the relationship between exposure to asbestos dusts, fibers and/or products and the contracting of diseases, including asbestosis, pneumoconiosis, mesothelioma, lung cancer and other cancers, with any person, corporation or other business entity, predecessors and/or successors including co-defendants in this action. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY `N O . 50: No. INTERROGATORY NO. 51: If your Answer in Interrogatory No. 50 is in the affirmative, then please state the following: (A) Wh e n said interchanges, exchanges or communications occurred; (B) The identity of those persons, corporations or business entities who participated in said interchanges, exchanges or communications; (C) The content of said interchanges, exchanges or communications ; and (D) The identity of the custodian of any documents which relate to said interchanges, exchanges or communications. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 51: Not applicable. i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 52: Identify all persons who have testified on your behalf before the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, any United States congressional committee, sub committee, administrative hearing or investigative proceeding or the subjects of the human health consequences of exposure to asbes-tos dusts, fibers and/or products and the setting. 22 modification, feasibility and acceptance of allegedly safe or proper levels of exposure to said asbestos and asbestos products. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 52: None, INTERROGATORY NO. 53: Identify all documents presented to or u t i l i z e d in the p r e p a r a t i o n of testi m o n y before .the organizations, agencies or committees referred to in Interrogatory No, 52, specifying which documents were presented or utilized for each such body and the present custodian and location of each document. j ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 53: Not applicable. i1 1 l] INTERROGATORY NO. 54: For all testimony* or presentations identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 52, identify: (A) The dates and descriptions of the hearings and : proceedings; j (B) The relationship b e t w e e n the person who i testified or responded andyou; and I (C) Allstudies, testresults, scientific and/or ! j medical documents relied upon by each person as the basis for ! ! any recommendation made or testimony given; ] ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 54: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY N O . 55: State your knowledge relating to the meaning of "threshold limit value" as it pertains to asbestos exposure and disease. . ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 55: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it requests a legal opinion or conclusion. INTERROGATORY NO. 56: With reference to "threshold limit 1 value" (which, for purposes of this interrogatory, means how much asbestos dust and/or fibers one can safely inhale, absorb ! or ingest without risk of disease or illness), state: 1 (A) When and by what means you obtained information related thereto; (B) The substance of any information imparted to you regarding the same; and (C) Whether and by what means you advised or warned j anyone of details relating thereto. j ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 56: Defendant objects to this I Interrogatory as it requests a legal opinion or a conclusion. LAW OFFICES M <? R, LIBOYYITZ a THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4305 INTERROGATORY N O . 57: State whether you ever knew that any governmental, private agency, and/or other entity issued guidelines suggesting a "threshold limit value" (as defined in Interrogatory No. 62 for exposure to asbestos dust and/or 23 LAW O FFICES MOORE, LIBOWITZ fit THOMAS A. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 2 !2 0 t-4 3 0 3 fibers. If so, state: (A) the identity of the agency or other entity which issued said guidelines; (B) The verbatim content of said guidelines; (C) The date said guidelines were issued; (D) The date you were first aware of the purpose of said guidelines; and (E) The custodian, location and identity of .all documents related thereto. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 57: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it requests a legal opinion or conclusion. INTERROGATORY NO. 58: State whether you ever possessed knowledge of documents indicating that existing or proposed threshold limit values (as defined in Interrogatory No. 56) were not safe or proper or that lower threshold limit values were necessary in order to prevent diseases caused by exposure to asbestos. If so, identify: (A) The source of such knowledge; (B) The persons who obtained such knowledge; (C) All documents relating thereto; and (D) The custodian and location of all documents identified in your Answer to Part (C) of this interrogatory. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 58: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that this Interrogatory assumes a truth not legally proven. As well, the Interrogatory seeks collateral information obtained in anticipation of litigation. INTERROGATORY NO. 59: State whether you were ever made aware that the proper method for determining safe levels of asbestos dust was to test concentrations of asbestos fibers in the air rather than the total number of asbestos particles in the air. If so, state: (A) The source of such knowledge; (B) The person who obtained such knowledge; (C) All documents relating thereto; and (D) The custodian and location of all documents identified in your Answer to Part (C) of this Interrogatory. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO: 59: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that this Interrogatory assumes a truth not legally proven. As well, the Interrogatory seeks collateral information obtained in anticipation of litigation. INTERROGATORY NO. 60: State in detail what tests or studies, 24 if any, you ever conducted or directed with regard to the quantity, quality, or threshold limit values (as defined in Interrogatory No. 56) of asbestos dust, fibers or particles to which insulators and others who use asbestos products and/or others working in the same vicinity are exposed. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY n o . 60: Defendant objects as related in Answers 38 and 56. ' INTERROGATORY NO. 61: State in detail what research, tests or studies, if any, you ever conducted or directed to determine whether the exposure of insulation workers or others to asbestos dust exceeded the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' (A.C.G.I.H.) recommenced threshold limit values. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 61: Objection. This Interrogatory as phrased appears to relate to asbestos thermal insulation products which this Defendant did not install. To the extent that this Interrogatory refers to anything else beyond that, it is impermissibly vague and ambiguous. INTERROGATORY NO. 62: State in detail what steps, if any, you ever took to determine whether the American Conference of Governmental Industrial* Hygienists; (A.C.G.I.H.) recommended threshold limit values for exposure to asbestos dust were accurate or reliable. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 62: None known. INTERROGATORY NO. 63: State your knowledge relating to the , meaning of "dose response relationship" as it pertains to ! exposure to asbestos dusts, fibers and/or products and the j contracting of disease, including asbestosis, pneumoconiosis, j mesothelioma, lung cancer and other cancers. j ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 63: Defendant objects to this ! I Interrogatory as it requests a legal opinion or conclusion. j Ii INTERROGATORY N O . 64; State whether you have ever placed any j warranties, guarantees or other such representations on any j asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory j Nos. 8 and 19 and/or on or in the containers or packages in LAW O FFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION which said products were sold, distributed or otherwise placed in the stream of commerce. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 64: Hopeman Brothers, Inc. was the FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 25 21201-4303 end user of all asbestos products described in the Response to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19. INTERROGATORY NO. 65: If your Answer is in the affirmative, please state the following: (A) The inclusive dates on which each such warranty, guarantee or other representation appeared on or w i t h `the product and/or on or in the container or package; (B) A verbatim description of each such warranty, guarantee or other representation; (C) A description of the location on the product and/or container where each such warranty, guarantee or other \ representation was placed; j (D) Each of your present orv former highest ; supervisory employees with knowledge of the' decision to place ; i any such warranties, guarantees or other representations on or j with the product and/or on or in the container or package; and (E) The custodian of all documents in your custody, j possession or control which relate to or describe any such i warranties, guarantees or other representations or the decision j to place any of these on or with th e 'product and/or on or in ! the container or package. i t ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 65: Not applicable. i INTERROGATORY NO. 66: State whether the content and/or ! placement of any warranty, guarantee or other representation described in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 64 and 65 was ever changed. If so, for each such change, identify: (A) The nature of the change, including a verbatim description, if applicable; (B) The date when the change was made and the inclusive dates during which such change appeared on or with the product and/or on or in the container or package; (C) The persons with personal knowledge of the reasons for making the change; and (D) The custodian of documents in your custody, j possession or control which relate to the decision and process : of making the change. ; ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 66: Not applicable. ; INTERROGATORY NO. 67: State when and by what means you became aware of the alleged hazards of exposure to asbestos dusts, fibers and/or products to the health of persons coming into . contact with, handling or using asbestos products. ' ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 67: Defendant objects to this LAW O FFICES MOORE, UBOWITZ I n t e r r o g a t o r y as it seeks factual admission to mer e ; & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION allegations. FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N . C H A R LE S STREET 26 BALTIMORE. MARYLANO 2 1 20 1 -43 0 3 INTERROGATORY NO. 68: State when and by what means you became aware that exposure to asbestos dusts, fibers and/or products was acknowledged to be hazardous to the health of persons coming in contact with, handling or using asbestos products. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 68: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it assumes a truth not legally proven. INTERROGATORY NO. 69: State whether you ever there is a causal connection between exposure to and: (A) Asbestosis; (B) Pneumoconiosis; (C) Lung Cancer; v (D) Mesothelioma; and (E) Other cancers. learned asbestos . that dust ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 69: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it requests a legal opinion or conclusions. j i n t e r r o g a t o r y N O . 70: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 69 is in the affirmative, identify the following as to each such disease listed therein; (A) When and by what means you first became aware of such causal connection; . (B) If your awareness of such causal connection was obtained at any conference, lecture, convention, symposium, or other such meeting, identify the event, the person who attended on your behalf and/or any documents obtained from such event; | and I (C) If your awareness of such causal connection was obtained from a medical or scientific study, or from any other published works, identify the same. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 70: See Answer 69. INTERROGATORY N O .71 : State whether you ever specifically ; informed the purchasers and/or users of the products identified j in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 that exposure to j asbestos dust could cause asbestosis, pneumoconiosis, lung j cancer, mesothelioma, and/or other cancers. If so, state: j (A) The date(s) of such notice to purchasers or j users ; : (B) The means used for transmittal of such notice; j (C) The custodian, identity and location of each document which refers to or contains information relevant to ! such notice; and ! LAW OFFICES M OORE. L.IBOW IT2 & THOMAS (D) The identity of each person who made decisions [ regarding the furnishing of such notice to purchasers and/or j users. ' . ; A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET 27 BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4305 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 71: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it assumes a truth not legally proven. INTERROGATORY NO. 72: State whether you ever specifically i nformed the distributors identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 20 and/or those identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 21 who resold or redistributed your asbestos products that exposure to asbestos dust could cause asbesto'sis, pneumoconiosis, lung cancer, mesothelioma, and/or other cancers. If so, state: (A) The date(s) of such notice; (B) The means used for transmittal of such notice; (C) The custodian, identity and location of each document which refers to or contains information relevant to such notice; and % ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 72: Not applicable. Hopeman Brothers, Inc. was not in the business of reselling or redistributing products. I INTERROGATORY NO. 73: State whether you ever provided any j caution, notice, warning or other statement or explanation of ; the potential health hazards of exposure to asbestos on or with j the asbestos products identified in your Answer to j Interrogatory Nos. 8 and19. ; ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 73: Defendant objects to this [ Interrogatory as it assumes the truth of a statement not j proven. Without waiving its objection, Defendant states that ! it was an end user of products manufactured by others. Nevertheless, in the early 1970's a label was affixed to the j panels. The label stated: LAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ A THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLANO zi20i*-303 CAUTION CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS AVOID CREATING DUST. BREATHING ASBESTOS DUST j MAY CAUSE SERIOUS BODILY | HARM. j INTERROGATORY NO. 74: Ifyour Answer to Interrogatory No. 73 | is in theaffirmative state as to each product identified in j yourAnswer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19: j (A) The date(s) on which such caution, notice, | warning or other statement or explanation first appeared; (B) The identity of each person with knowledge of 28 decisions made regarding the use of such caution, notice, warning or other statement or explanation; (C) The verbatim content of each caution, notice, warning or other statement or explanation when it was first used; (D) Whether the caution, notice, warning or other statement or explanation was ever altered, amended or changed. If so, how, when and why was it altered, amended or changed; and (E) The location of the caution, notice, warning or other statement or explanation on each such product and/or its container or package. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 74: See Answer 73. INTERROGATORY N O . 75 : State when you first became aware that asbestos products were being labeled with a caution, warning, notice or other statement or explanation concerning the j potential health hazards resulting from the use of asbestos \ products and/or exposure to asbestos dust or fibers- and j identify the product(s) and manufacturer(s) with which such j label was connected. j ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 75; Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it is impermissibly broad and is not limited or relevant to those products installed by this Defendant. ' ' i Without waiving its objection, Defendant states that in the . early 1970's Defendant became aware of such labels. See Answer 1 U W OFFICES M OORE. LIBOW IT2 ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21*01-4303 73. t INTERROGATORY NO. 76: Identify the officer, agent, servant, ; employees or other representative of yours who first obtained . an awareness that asbestos products or packaging were being labeled as described in Interrogatory No.75. ! . I a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 76: Unknown atthis time. ! j i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 77: Identify the custodian, identity and j location of all documents related to the knowledge obtained by ; you regarding and labeling of asbestos products as described in j Interrogatory No. 75. j ANSWER t o i n t e r r o g a t o r y n o . 77: Defendant objects to this j Interrogatory as it is impermissibly broad and is not limited j j or relevant to those products installed by this Defendant. Without waiving this objection, Defendant states that if such a 29 Hopeman Brothers, Inc. document exists, it would be located at the offices of Hopeman Brothers, Inc. in Waynesboro, VA. INTERROGATORY NO. 78: State when and by what means you first became aware that Johns-Manville Corporation or any of its affiliated companies placed on its asbestos products a caution, warning, notice, other statement or representation concerning the potential health hazards resulting from the use of asbestos products and/or exposure to asbestos dust or fibers. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 78; Objection. This Defendant does not know when manufacturers began labeling their products. INTERROGATORY NO. 79: Identify the officer, agent, servant, employee or other representative of yours who first became aware that Johns-Manville asbestos products were being labeled as described in Interrogatory No. 78. a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 79: Unknown at this time. INTERROGATORY N O . 80: Identify the custodian, identity and location of all documents related to the knowledge obtained by you regarding the labeling of asbestos products by JohnsManville Corporation or its affiliated companies as described in Interrogatory No. 78. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 80: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it is impermissibly broad and is not limited or relevant to those products installed by this Defendant. Without waiving this objection, Defendant states that if such a Hopeman Brothers, Inc. document exists, it would be located at the offices of Hopeman Brothers, Inc. in Waynesboro, VA. LAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ Gt THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4305 INTERROGATORY NO. 81: If upon learning that Johns-Manville Corporation or its affiliated companies labeled its asbestos products as described in Interrogatory No. 78 you did not apply such labels to the products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19, state: A) The reason(s) for such a decision; (B) The identity of any agent, servant, employee, officer or representative of yours involved in discussions and decisions regarding the same; and (C) The custodian, identity and location of all documents pertaining to such a decision. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 81: Not applicable. 30 i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 82: State whether you specifically informed your employees, accents, servants and/or contract units that use of asbestos products and/or exposure to asbestos dust or fibers was either actually or alleged to be hazardous to their health. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 82; Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it seeks factual admission to mere allegations and, as well, it includes factual assumptions which may not be true. INTERROGATORY NO. 83: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 82 is in the affirmative, state: _ (A) When and in what manner you first provided such information to these persons; (B) The identity of any agent, servant, employee, officer or representative of yours involved in discussions and decisions with regard to providing information to these persons; . . ^ (C) The verbatim content of any written documents and/or communications containing such information; and (D) The custodian, identity and location of all documents which relate or pertain to providing such information to these persons. . ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 83: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 84: Describe in detail any precautionary procedures which you urged or required your employees, agents, servants and/or contract units to follow so as to reduce and/or avoid the potential hazards or dangers associated with use of asbestos products and/or exposure to asbestos dust or fibers and state when and how each such procedure was introduced to these individuals. a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 84: This Defendant was not in the LAW OFFICES M OORE. LBOW TZ ft THOMAS A TROPESSIONAL a s so c ia t io n FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLANO 2 t2 0 1 > 4 3 0 3 business of manufacturing, selling or distributing asbestos products. This Defendant installed products according to s h i p 's specifications, some of w h i c h products may have contained asbestos. In 1966, this Defendant began developing vacuum saws. In 1968, the Defendant directed its employees to wear respirators when panels were being cut. i n t e r r o g a t o r y n o . 85: State whether you ever required your 31 employees, agents, servants and/or contract units who worked with and around asbestos and/or asbestos products to wear respirators, dust masks, protective clothing and/or other protective devices. If so, state: (A) Which employees, agents, servants and/or contract units, by type of employment and department, were required to use each such protective device; (B) The date(s) on which the directive relative to each such protective device was issued for each type of employee and each department; (C) Which type of protective device was required to be used or worn by each type of employee and each department; (D) The identity of any agent, servant, employee, ! officer or representative of yours involved in discussions and i decisions regarding the same; and ;i (E) The custodian, identity anvd location of all ji documents pertaining to protective devices. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 85: See Answer No. 84. i ; INTERROGATORY NO. 86: State whether at the commencement of an j: individual's employment with you, from 1930 to the present, you ' informed that person as to possible' health ramifications of ! working with and around asbestos fibers, dust and/or products. I; If so, set forth: i (A) The nature of the warning; | (B) The m a n n e r in w h i c h said information is | communicated and, if the communication is in writing, attach a copy hereto; j (C) When such practice was initiated; and i (D) By whom such information was communicated. ; a n s w e r TO i n t e r r o g a t o r y n o . 86: Defendant objects to this I n t e r r o g a t o r y as it seeks factual admission to mere ! allegations. Further, this Interrogatory is overly broad, vague, burdensome in the scope and not limited to information pertaining to these Plaintiffs. INTERROGATORY N O . 87: State whether, based upon the material contents, the manufacturing m e t h o d s and the method of i application or installation of your asbestos products (or the asbestos products installed or fabricated by you), that those asbestos products can generally be applied by an insulator or others without liberating asbestos fibers. LAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 30 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 2 120t -A30S ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 87: This Defendant was an end user, a contractor or installer which used products manufactured by others. Defendant was not in the business of 32 installing asbestos thermal insulation. INTERROGATORY NO. 88: State whether it was foreseeable to you that your asbestos-containing insulation products would have to be removed, stripped or replaced at any time after installation. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 88: Defendant objects to'the Interrogatory on the basis that it calls for conclusions which Hopeman Brothers, Inc. is not competent to make. Without waiving its objection, Defendant states that it was not in the business of installing asbestos thermal insulation. I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 89: State w h e t h e r you ever provided insulators and others who would be applying or removing your asbestos products instructions concerning safety precautions to use during use of or exposure to such products. a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 89: See Answers 87 and 88. INTERROGATORY NO. 90: State when you first received notice that any person was claiming injury as a result of use of and/or exposure to asbestos products identified in you Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 90: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory insofar as it requests information, unrelated to the Maryland litigation or to the dates when Plaintiffs were employed. Without waiving its objections, Hopeman Brothers, Inc. states it first became aware of such a claim in 1979 in this geographical area. LAW OFFICES M OORE. LIBOW ITZ a THOMAS A PROFESSION AU ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 2 1 2 0 1 --4 3 0 3 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 91: With regard to the first notice of c l aim of injury d e s c r i b e d in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 90 and regarding all claims filed prior to 1970, for injury resulting from use of and/or exposure to asbestos products, state: (A) The identity of each claimant; (B) The date of notice of each claim; (C) A description of each claim; (D) The type of injury allegedly sustained by each claimant ; (E) The identity of each attorney representing the individuals making such claims ; 33 (F) The style, case number and court applicable to each claim; (G) The resolution of each claim; and (H) The custodian, identity and location of all documents which relate or pertain to each claim. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 91: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory insofar as it requests information not related to the Maryland litigation or to the Plaintiffs' employer. To this extent, information sought by Plaintiffs in this Interrogatory is not relevant to the subject matter of this litigation and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the -j l discovery of admissible evidence. j INTERROGATORY NO. 92: State whether, prior to 1970, any person j filed a claim against any worker's compensation insurance j carrier which provided coverage for you alleging that he or she j contracted a disease as a result of use of and/or exposure to asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 90. ; ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 92: To the best of Defendants' : knowledge, none areknown. , INTERROGATORY NO. 93: If your Answer is in the affirmative, provide the following information: (A) A list of each such claim by claimant's name, : date claim filed and jurisdiction; and (B) A brief summary of the disposition of each such claim. i ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 93: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 94: State whether you ever received any ' reports or communications from your worker's compensation insurance carrier or products liability insurance carrier with regard to potential health hazards incident to use of asbestos I products and/or exposure to asbestos fibers or dust. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 94: Defendant objects to this ; Interrogatory on the basis that it is overly broad and unduly j LAW OFFICES MOORE. UBOWITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND Z t2 0 1 * 4 3 0 S burdensome,speculativeand irrelevant to Plaintiffs' claims. ' Without waiving its objection. Defendant states that no such 34 records have been found concerning the period when Defendant was working in the geographical area of this litigation. INTERROGATORY NO. 95: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 94 is in the affirmative, state: (A) The substance of the contents of such reports or communications, and attach copies thereof to your answers; (B) The identity of the insurance carrier from which you received each report or communication; (C) The dates of each such report or communication; and (D) The custodian, identity and location of a document whi c h relate or p e r t a i n to such reports or communications. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 95: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY NO. 96: State whether you ever maintained or operated a unit or unit of your corporation, including, but not limited to, divisions, subsidiaries or any other entity, which was/were under contract to apply or install the asbestos products described in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 96: None. : INTERROGATORY NO. 97: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 96 is in the affirmative, identify and all claims filed by workers in such contract units for disease arising out of useof 1 asbestos products and/or exposure to asbestos fibers ordust ! and, as to each such claim, state: ! (A) The date on which you first received notice; j (B) The identity of the claimant; ; (C) The nature of the claim; j (D) The style, case number and jurisdiction; ; (E) The resolution of the claim; and j (F) The custodian, identity and location of all j documents which relate or pertain to each claim. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 97: Not applicable. I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 98: Identify any and all insurance j agreements entered into by and between any person carrying on an insurance business and you which may be available to satisfy part or all of a judgment that might be entered into this action or to indemnify or reimburse you for payments made to satisfy the judgment. As to each such agreement, identify the insurance carrier, the amount of coverage and the applicable dates of coverage. LAW OFFICES MOORE. UBOWITZ & THOMAS A m o r C S S iO H A L A M M O CtA TtO fi FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLANO 21201-4303 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 98: Liberty Mutual Insurance Company provided the basic underlying insurance coverage for 35 this Defendant. There is as well certain other exess coverage which may have been provided by other companies from time to time. INTERROGATORY NO. 99: Describe the method by which you have maintained, records concerning the manufacture, sale, advertising, distribution, delivery and installation of each of the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 99: Defendant was simply an inst a l l e r of products, some of w h i c h p'roducts may have contained asbestos. Records, to the extent that they exist, have been maintained at the offices of Hopeman Brothers, Inc. in Waynesboro, VA. INTERROGATORY NO. 1O0: With regard to the record-keeping method described in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 99, identify: (A) . Each present and former corporate department, division or subdivision responsible for maintaining the records ; * (B) How the records are kept, e.g., in boxes, files, on microfilm, microfiche or computer tape or disk;.. (C) The inclusive dates of manufacture, sale, advertising, distribution, delivery and installation that the record keeping system covers; (D) The location(s) whe r e such records are maintained; and (E) The identity of each person employed by you at any time from 1930 to the present, in the highest supervisory capacity, who is or was directly responsible for the collection and maintenance of such records. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 100: See Answer 99. LAW OFFICES MOORE, U0OW TZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 2 t2 0 t-4 3 0 3 INTERROGATORY N O . 101: If the record keeping system described in your A n s w e r to I n t e r r o g a t o r y No. 99 includes use of : microfile, microfiche, computer tape or disk or any other ; system in which data is taken from other records, state whether i you have retained the documents or other material from which , the information entered into these modes of storage was ; obtained. If not, indicate: J (A) The date when and location where the original j records were destroyed or discarded; > 36 (B) The custodian and location of the records prior to their destruction; and (C) The identity of each employee, representative, official or agent of your who ordered, authorized or supervised said destruction. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 101; See Answer 99. INTERROGATORY N O . 102: State whether, at any time from 193 to the present, you made any representations that the presence of asbestos in the products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 made these products superior, in any way, to any asbestos-free product or material intended for the same or similar use. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 102: None. ,, . INTERROGATORY NO. 103: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 102 is in the affirmative, indicate with respect to each such representation: (A) The date(s) on which the representation was made; (B) Its exact content; and (C) The manner in which it was communicated. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 103: Not applicable. INTERROGATORY N O . 104: State whether, at any time from 1930 to the present, you made any representations that the use of asbestos or the use of the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 was safe, harmless or not dangerous. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 104: To the best of Defendant's knowledge, no. INTERROGATORY NO. 105: If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 104 is in the affirmative, indicate as to each such representation: (A) The dates (s) on which the representation was made ; (B) Its exact content; and (C) The manner in which it was communicated. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 105; Not applicable. LAW OFFICES MOORE. UIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL a s s o c ia t io n FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 INTERROGATORY n o . 106: State whether any of the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 were ever stored or warehoused by you in Maryland at any time from 1930 to the present. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 106: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome, 37 oppressive, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and is not limited to specific times applicable to this litigation. Without waiving its objection, Defendant states products were transported to shipyard for use by Hopeman Brothers, Inc.'s employees. To the extent that products were not used on the day delivered, they were stored in the building provided to Hopeman Brothers, Inc. by the shipyard. . INTERROGATORY N O . 107 : If your Answer to Interrogatory No. 106 is in the affirmative, identify: (A) The address of each warehouse or storage facility; (B) The asbestos products stored or warehoused at each warehouse or storage facility identified in your Answer to part (A) of this Interrogatory; (C) The year(s) of such storage or warehousing; and (D) The custodian, identity and location of each document in your custody, possession or control which describes or relates to such storage or warehousing. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 107: Specific address is unknown. LAW OFFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 30 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLANO 21 20 1-4 30 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 108: Identify the means by which the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 were transported to Maryland at any time from 1930 to the present and state: (A) If the asbestos products were transported by rail, identify the name(s) of the railroad company(ies) providing that service and the year(s) during which such service was used; (B) If the asbestos products were transported by truck, identify the name(s) of the carrier providing that service and the year(s) during which such service was used; (C) The asbestos products were transported by vessel, identify the name(s) of the shipline providing that service and the year(s) during which such service was used; (D) The iden t i t y of each employee of yours responsible for coordinating the transport or delivery of such products to Maryland; (E) The identity of each employee, officer, agent or r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of yours wi t h p e r s o n a l knowledge of the transport or delivery of such products to Maryland; and (F) The custodian, identity and location of each document which describes or relates to the transport or delivery of such products to Maryland. 38 LAW OFFICES M OORE. LIBOWTTZ a THOMAS A ^ROFESStONAl. ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 30 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND) 21201-4303 ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 108: Products were shipped by truck or rail. INTERROGATORY N O . 109: Identify each person whom you expect to call as an expert witness at trial, state the subject matter on which each expert is expected to testify, state the substance of the findings and opinions. ' ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 109: The information requested is presently unknown by this Defendant. However, Defendant reserves the right to call any experts identified by any other Defendant. INTERROGATORY NO. 110: With regard to expert witnesses identified in your Answer to Interrogatory No. 109, identify by case name, date, court and case number and deposition and trial testimony given by each such expert and state the custodian and location of transcripts thereof. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 110: See Answer 109. INTERROGATORY NO. Ill: Identify each person who has testified on your behalf at trial or by deposition in a case alleging asbestos-related injury, state the custodian and location of transcripts thereof, and set forth the case name, number, court and date with respect to each proceeding in which the witnesses testified. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. Ill: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it calls for work product information prepared in anticipation of litigation, INTERROGATORY NO. 112: State whether you contend that asbestos products can be manufactured or treated so as to eliminate all potential health hazards to workers who use asbestos products and/or are exposed to asbestos fibers or dust. If so, explain in detail the factual basis for this contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 112: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that it requires an opinion of an expert, and there may be divergence of opinion on this point. Defendant, as an installer of products manufactured by others, is without sufficient information to answer this Interrogatory. 39 The Defendant reserves the right to contend such. t n t e r ROGATORY NO. 113: State whether you contend that any person or business entity not presently a party to this action is r e s p o n s i b l e in w h o l e or in part for any of the plaintiff's (s') damages. If so, identify each such person or business entity and state the facts which form the basis for each such contention. ' ANSWER INTERROGATORY NO. 113: Any manufacturer of products identified as having been installed by this Defendant. INTERROGATORY NO. 114: State whether you contend that asbestos products are not inherently dangerous. If so, state all material and relevant facts and documents which form the basis for such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 114: Defendant objects to this I n t e r r o g a t o r y on the basis that it is a contention Interrogatory and is overbroad. Further, it seeks a legal opinion and work product. INTERROGATORY NO. 115: State whether or not you contend that you did not have a duty to warn users of the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19 of the hazards and risks of use. of and exposure thereto. If so, state all material and relevant facts and identify all documents which form the basis for such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 115: See Answer 114. INTERROGATORY NO. 116: State whether or not you contend that you performed adequate tests of the safety of the asbestos products identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 8 and 19, and state all material and relevant facts and identify all documents which form the basis for such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 116: See Answer 114. LAW O FFICES MOORE. LIBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROreSStONAC ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 30 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE, MARYLANO 21201-4303 INTERROGATORY NO. 117: State whether you contend that you did not conspire with others to allow asbestos products to be used without adequate warnings or without any warnings, regarding the hazards or risks of use of and/or exposure thereto. If so, state all material and relevant facts and identify all documents which form the basis for such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 117: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that its scope is grossly overbroad 40 and it seeks proof of a negative proposition through factual and document identification. Without waiving its objection. Defendant states yes. INTERROGATORY NO. 118: State whether or not you contend that there are circumstances under which asbestos products can safely be handled and used. If so, state all material and relevant facts and identify all documents which form the basis for such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 118; Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that is overbroad. Further, Defendant objects to this Interrogatory in that it requests an opinion regarding which certain experts will differ, and the specific products about which some experts will differ are not listed. i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 119: State whether or not you contend that there is now or ever has been a distinction between one or more of the following with respect to use of and^ exposure to asbestos products and the health hazards or risks relating thereto: miners, millers, textile workers, asbestos plant workers, insulators, shipyard workers, steel plant workers, building tradesmen, industrial workers, and brake lining mechanics. If so, state all material and relevant facts and identify all documents which form the basis for such a contention. a n s w e r TO i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 119: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the basis that it is vague, overbroad, and seeks irrelevant information. Further, this Interrogatory seeks the opinion of an expert and there is a divergence of opinion on this point. This Interrogatory seeks information the discovery of which will not lead to relevant or admissible LAW OFFICES MOORE. UBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201*4903 evidence. i n t e r r o g a t o r y n o . 120: State whether or not you contend that there are differences between asbestos fiber types specifically, chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite, actinolite, anthophyllite or tremolite, with regard to diseases they may be 41 c a p a b l e o f c a u s i n g . If so, s t a t e all facts, a n d i d e n t i f y a l l documents which form the basis for such a contention. ANSWER TO TNTERROGATORY NO. 120; See Answer 114. i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 121; If you are an insulation contractor, identify all job sites at which you undertook the performance of work within the State of Maryland from the date of the inception of your company to the present and include as to each such job site: (A) The identity of employees, including foremen and helpers; (B) Dates; (C) Location; (D) Asbestos products used; (E) The identity of the general contractor and all subcontractors; ' (F) Contracts; (G) Bids ; (H) Specifications; (I) Work orders; (J) Estimates; (K) Reports; and (L) Job Books ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 121; This Defendant was a ship joiner. However, sometimes the ship required insulation behind the panels. The insulation used was non-asbestos fiberglass or mineral wool. T N T E R R O G A T O R Y n o . 122: Name any person not heretofore mentioned having personal knowledge of the facts material to this case. ANSWER TNTERROGATORY NO. 122: Defendant reserves the right to identify corporate fact and expert witnesses, with reasonable notice to Plaintiffs. PART TT - SPF.GTFTG INTERROGATORIES TO BE ANSWERED SEPARATELY AS TO EACH PLAINTIFF LAW OFFICES MOORE, UBOWITZ a THOMAS A PR O FE SS IO N A L A SSO C IA TIO N FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 TNTERROGATORY N O . 1: Have you undertaken an investigation of the occurrence(s) alleged in plaintiff's Complaint? If so, state: . . ^, . (A) The identity of the person(s) participating m each such investigation; _ (B) Whether you have obtained statements from any 42 witness(es) and, if so, identify: (i) The identity of each such witness; and (ii) The identity of the person in possession of each such statement. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Discovery permitted under the Maryland Rules of Civil Procedure has been or will^ be undertaken by counsel on behalf of Defendant. INTERROGATORY N O . 2: State whether you contend that you had no reason or duty to warn the plaintiff or the plaintiff's employer of the hazards and risks of use of and exposure to asbestos products. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which form the basis of such a contention. a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory as it assumes the truth of a statement not proven. Without waiving its objection. Defendant states that it was an end user of products manufactured or mined by others. i Nevertheless, in the early 1970's a label was affixed to the j i I panels. The label stated: ! CAUTION CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS AVOID CREATING DUST. BREATHING ASBESTOS DUST MAY CAUSE SERIOUS BODILY HARM. INTERROGATORY N O . 3 : State whether you contend that you gave adequate warnings to users of and to those exposed to your . asbestos products, including the plaintiff, of the hazards and , risks of use of and exposure thereto. If so, state all facts ; and identify all documents which form the basis of such a ; contention. . ! ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3: See Answer 2, Part II. LAW O FFICES M O O RE, U B O W IT Z & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 21201-4303 INTERROGATORY N O . 4: State whether you contend that you recommended safety procedures regarding the use of and exposure to asbestos products to the plaintiff or the plaintiff s employer. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which farm the basis of such a. contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY N O . 4: This Defendant installed products to c o m p l y wi t h s h i p 's specifications. This 43 Defendant was an end user of products manufactured by others. INTERROGATORY NO. 5: State whether you contend that the plaintiff was exposed, if at all, to a safe amount of asbestos or to less than the "threshold limit" of exposure to asbestos j dust and fibers from the use of and exposure to asbestos products. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which form the basis of such a contention. ' A N S W E R t o I N T E R R O G A T O R Y N O . 5: See Answer 2, Part II. I However, Defendant reserves the right to so contend. j INTERROGATORY NO. 6: State whether you contend that the plaintiff's disabilities or injuries are unrelated to the use of and exposure to asbestos products. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which form the basis of such a ( contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Defendant contends that Plaintiff's alleged disabilities or injuries are unrelated to . alleged exposure to the products it may have installed. The Defendant also reserves the right to contend that the Plaintiff has no disability related to asbestos exposure. INTERROGATORY N O . 7: *State whether you contend that the plaintiff's injuries are related in whole or in part to cigarette smoking. If so, state all facts and.identify all documents which form the basis of such contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks an expert opinion beyond the scope of these Interrogatories. Without waiving this objection, Defendant states that it may so contend based upon facts established in discovery or trial concerning use of LAW O FFICES M O O RE. LIB O W ITZ a THOMAS A moreSSIOHAL Afi*OCATiOK FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4305 tobacco. INTERROGATORY N O . 8: State whether you contend that the plaintiff's injuries are due to an act of the plaintiff's employer. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which form the basis of such a contention. A N S W E R T O I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 8; D e f e n d a n t objects to this 44 Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous and fails to specify the "employer" to which reference is made. Without waiving this objection, Defendant reserves the right to so contend should such basis be revealed in discovery. INTERROGATORY NO. 9: State whether you contend that 'the plaintiff did not work with and was not exposed to any asbestos products mined, manufactured, sold and/or distributed by you. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which form the basis of such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Defendant contends that no injurious exposure may have resulted from exposure to this Defendant's installation of products. INTERROGATORY NO. 10: State whether you contend that the asbestos products which the plaintiff used and/or was exposed were not under your exclusive control.- If so, state all facts and identify all document which form the basis of such a ; contention. j ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Defendant has no idea of the | myriad of products to which the Plaintiff alleges exposure. ! . i Therefore, Defendant can,not properly respond. j INTERROGATORY NO. 11: State whether you contend that there j were changes made to your asbestos products after they left j your control. If so, state all facts and identify all j documents which form the basis of such a contention. ; i ANSWER TO i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 11: ThisDefendant installed j products according to ship's specifications. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: State whether you contend that the plaintiff's claim is barred by the applicable statute of j limitations. If so, state all facts and identify all documents | which form the basis of such contention. j l ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Defendant reserves the right j ! to so c o n t e n d if facts supporting such develop or are j LAW O FFICES MOORE. L ie o w ir z & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE, MARYLANO 21 201*4305 established. I N T E R R O G A T O R Y NO. 13; S t a t e w h e t h e r y o u c o n t e n d t h a t t h e plaintiff's claim is barred by the doctrine of assumption of 45 the risk. If so, state all fac t s a n d id e n t i f y all documents which form the basis of such a contention. ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13; Defendant reserves the right to so c o ntend if facts s u p p o r t i n g such develop or are j established. ! . INTERROGATORY NO- 14; State whether you contend that the plaintiff's claims barred by his alleged contributory negligence. If so, state all facts and identify all documents which form the basis of such a contention. : ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14: Defendant reserves the right | to so contend if facts s u p p o r t i n g such develop or are I i established. I ! t n t e r r o g a t o r y n o . 15: State whether you contend that the ; plaintiff's claim is barred by his alleged misuse of the , asbestos products with which he worked. If so, state all facts ] and identify all documents which form the basis of such a ; contention. j a n s w e r TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15: Defendant reserves the right to so c o ntend if facts s u p p o r t i n g such develop or are established. INTERROGATORY NO. 16: State whether you contend that the j plaintiff's injuries were caused by any intervening acts or , superseding negligence. If so, state all facts and identify , all documents which form the basis of such a contention. j ANSWER TO i n t e r r o g a t o r y NO. 16: Defendant reserves the right to so contend if facts s u p p o r t i n g such develop or are established. ! LAW OFFICES MOORE. UBOWITZ a THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET 46 BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 2I20-A 303 I HEREBY CERTIFY, that the matters and facts contained within the Amended Answers to Interrogatories are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief Hopeman Brothers, Inc. Bv: Q r r & t s j Jcfiin E. Baker, Vice President and Secretary LAW OFFICES MOORE. LiBOWITZ & THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 30 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIMORE. MARYLAND 21201-4309 rF.RTTFTCATF. OF SERVICE //< I HEREBY c e r t i f y , that on this /t? day of 1989, a copy of the foregoing was mailed, postage pre paid to: LAW OFFICES MOORE, LIBOWITZ ft THOMAS i PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 300 N. CHARLES STREET B A L T IM O R E . MARYLAND 21201*4309 'Harry Goldman, Jr., Esquire David M. Layton GOLDMAN & SKEEN, P.A. 1123 Munsey Building 7 North Calvert Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Attorneys for Plaintiffs v Carl E. Tuerk, Jr., Esquire COOPER, BECKMAN & TUERK Suite 700 Provident Financial Center Calvert & Lexington Streets ' Baltimore, Maryland 21201 . . __ Co-Counsel and Attorneys for Plaintiffs Peter G. Angelos, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF PETER G. ANGELOS 5905 Harford Road . Baltimore, Maryland_ 21214 Attorney for Plaintiffs "Rudolph L. Rose, Esquire William J. Jackson, Esquire SEMMES, BOWEN & SEMMES 250 West Pratt Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 ^ Attorneys for Allied Corporation "John Nagle, Esquire POWER & MOSNER 21 Susquehanna Avenue Towson, Maryland 21204 A t t o r n e y for B a b c o c k & W i l c o x C o ., & MCIC, Inc. -H. Emslie Parks, Esquire PARKS, HANSEN & DITCH _ _ 1012 Mercantile - Towson Building 409 Washington Avenue Towson, Maryland 21204 _ Attorney for Celotex Corporation "George P . Adams, Esquire LAW OFFICES MOORE. LBOWITZ ft THOMAS . P R O FE S S IO N A L ASSO CIATIO N FIFTH FLOOR 3 0 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE. MARYLAND 2IZ01-A 303 343 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 Attorney for Combustion Corporation Engineering James R. Eyler, Esquire MILES & STOCKBRIDGE 10 Light Street _ Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Attorneys for Owens-Coming Fiberglass Corporation and Corhart Refractories "Jay Mornstein, Esquire FRANK, BERNSTEIN, CONAWAY & GOLDMAN 300 East Lombard Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 ^ Attorney for Crane Packing Company Keith R. Truffer, Esquire ROYSTON, MUELLER, MCLEAN & REID Suite 600 102 West Pennsylvania Avenue Towson, Maryland 21204-4575 Attorney for Durabla Manufacturing Co. 'Michael B. Mann, Esquire MANN & WHELLEY 600 Mercantile - Towson Building 409 Washington Avenue Towson, Maryland 21204 Attorney for Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. OWENS & ROBERTSON, P.A. Suite 100 216 E. Lexington Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Attorneys for Foster Wheeler Corporation and Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation S. Kennon Scott, Esquire HARTMAN & CRAIN 2660 Riva Road, Fourth Floor Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Attorney for Garlock MOORE, UBOWITZ ft THOMAS A PROFESSIONAL, ASSOCIATION FIFTH FLOOR 30 0 N. CHARLES STREET BALTIM ORE, MARYLANO 2 1 Z O t-4 3 0 S Jeremy North, Esquire LAW OFFICES OF DELVERNE A. DRESSEL 906 Munsey Building Calvert & Fayette Streets Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Attorney for General Refractories Company Robert P. Schlenger, Esquire LORD & WHIP 800 One Center Plaza 120 West Fayette Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 Attorney for Harbison - Walker Refractories Robert D. Klein, Esquire DIGGES, WHARTON & LEVIN P.O. Box 551 ' 225 Duke of Gloucester Street Annapolis, Maryland 21401-0551 Attorney for International Minerals Corporation and Kaiser Aluminum Corporation - & Chemical & Chemical ' Louis G. Close, Esquire WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON 7 St. Paul Street Suite 1400 Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Attorneys for Center for Claims Resolution James R. Eyler, Esquire MILES & STOCKBRIDGE 10 Light Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Attorney for Owens-Corning Corporation Fiberglass Lee H. Ogburn, Esquire KRAMON & GRAHAM, P.A. Sun Life Building Charles Center Baltimore, Maryland 21201 Attorney for 1 ` Company HOMAS 300 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201-4305 (301) 752-2468