Document dbxD9YRd7qkgbw0ryQKKNq8B

CHARLIE BETHEL, etal., vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP.,etal. NO. 96-06238-A IN THE DISTRICT COURT DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEFENDANTS' ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION SUBJECT TO AND WITHOUT WAIVING SPECIAL APPEARANCE TO PRESENT MOTION OBJECTING TO JURISDICTION TO: CHARLIE BETHEL, by and through his counsel of record, Peter A. Kraus, Baron & Budd, P.C., 3102 Oak Lawn Ave., Suite 1100, Dallas, Texas 75219-4281. Pursuant to Rules 120a, 166b and 169 of the Texas Rules ofCivil Procedure, Defendant Illinois Central Railroad Company ("ICRC") hereby files its Responses and Objections to Plaintiffs' Request for Production, Subject to and Without Waiving Special Appearance to Present Motion Objecting to Jurisdiction. ThomasR. Peters GUNDLACH/ LEE, EGGMANN, BOYLE & ROESSLER 5000 WesrMain Street, P.O. Box 23560 Belleville, IL 62223-0560 Telephone: (618)277-9000 Kenneth S. Wall BROWN McCARROLL & OAKS HARTLINE 300 Crescent Court, Suite 1400 Dallas, TX 75201-6929 (214)999-6100 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS ILLINOIS CENTRAL CORPORATION and ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY I. PRF.IJ WUC ARY STATEMENT ANP^JECTIONS Subject to and without waiving its current or any future special appearances, ICRC makes this preliminary statement and these objections: ICRC currently has special appearance motions pending in various cases in Dallas County, Texas. Each ofthese cases involve numerous Plaintiffs who are residents ofstates other than Texas. Each and every objection, response or matter contained in these responses and answers is made strictly subject to and without waiving any pending special appearance motion. To the extent that ICRC is named and served as a party in future cases in Dallas County, these responses shall also be subject to and without waiving any future special appearance motions. ICRC expressly objects to each and every discovery request to the extent that it seeks any information in those cases wherein a special appearance is pending for the reason that such discovery requests are not related to any special appearance motion or likely to lead to the discovery of evidence admissible in a special appearance hearing. ICRC does not own or control any railroad track in Texas. ICRC will provide substantive responses to those requests related to jurisdictional issues as they relate to those Plaintiffs who have sued ICRC. However, ICRC objects to each and every discovery request and/or interrogatory to the extent that it is unrestricted as to subject, time and geography on the grounds that such requests/interrogatories are unreasonably burdensome and not reasonably related to the discovery ofjurisdictional evidence related to such claims. -2- n. GENERAL OBJECTIONS 1. ICRC objects to these requests in their entirety for the reason that such requests were not in the master set ofdiscovery. Plaintiffs have neither sought nor obtained leave of court to serve this Defendant with discovery other than the master discovery previously approved by Dallas County. ICRC objects to this unilateral attempt by Plaintiffs to circumvent the procedures set forth by the Master Asbestos Judge in Dallas County. However, because Defendant has filed a Special Appearance contestingjurisdiction over it by this Texas Court, Defendant will provide substantive responses to those requests which are jurisdictional in nature. 2. ICRC further objects to each and every discovery request, interrogatory and request for admission to the extent that they require ICRC to search through all corporate documents on the ground that such requests are clearly overly board, unduly burdensome, exceptionally expensive, and not reasonably related to the discovery ofevidence relevant to the claims ofPlaintiffs claiming injury arising out of alleged exposure while employed by ICRC in Texas. 3. ICRC further objects to those requests as a whole, since they seek matters which are privileged under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and Texas Rules ofCivil Evidence, including, but not limited to, information an<f matters precluded by the attomey/client privilege, attomey/work product exemption and the party communications privilege. 4. ICRC further objects to the definitions set forth at the beginning ofPlaintiffs* requests as an improper attempt to give meanings to ordinary English words that are contrary to their accepted meanings and which render the requests ambiguous, overly broad and/or unduly burdensome to answer. 5. ICRC further objects to Plaintiffs* requests as vague since they are not limited to the time and location when and where Plaintiffs were allegedly employed by ICRC. 6. ICRC expressly incorporates each and every general objection and preliminary statement into its response to each interrogatory, subject to and without waiving its special appearance motion objecting to jurisdiction. -3- SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. is Produce any and ail documents (memoranda and/pr other writings, including but not limited to books, pamphlets, or other written materials of any kind or character) in your possession, custody or control which would indicate that asbestos fibers, when inhaled, can be hazardous to the health ofhuman beings. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the metal impressions and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(d); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, ifany, with the State ofTexas and is therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further object to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states it possesses no such documents other than those gathered by its attorneys in anticipation oflitigation, subject to both the attorney-client and work produce privileges. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: Produce any and all documents (memoranda and/or other writings) in your possession, custody or control that in ant way related to the hazards of asbestos and/or airborne asbestos. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party -4- communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously riled objection, defendant incorporates its response to the previous requests as its response herein. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 3: Produce any and all documents in your possession, custody or control which were disseminated or published by any person, trade association or organization of any type and that contain information relating to the hazards of asbestos and/or airborne asbestos. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. -5- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states none other than that already produced by parties to this litigation, or those documents created or obtained in anticipation oflitigation. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4: Produce any and all safety meeting minutes or other documents, memoranda and/or writings that refer to the dangers of asbestos and/or safety measures to be taken by crew members or workers or employees in the vicinity of asbestos-containing products and/or machinery requiring the use of asbestos or asbestos-containing products and/or materials on Defendant's railroad. Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because ofits breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(d); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it is in possession ofno such documents. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5: Produce any and all contracts, memoranda, and/or other writings that in any way reflect arrangements made for the removal ofasbestos and/or the installation of asbestos-containing products [on] Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to -6- answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, and limited to the Friscati shops and the storehouse at Porter Yard where plaintiffworked, defendant states that it does not have any such documents in its possession. REQUEST FOR_PJlQPUCTION NO. 6: Produce any and all docs that in any way reflect a removal plan or organized written criteria or schedule for the removal of asbestos on Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -7- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its response to the previous request as its response herein. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7: Produce any and all documents that discuss or relate in any way to removal of asbestos from any Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid.503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its response to request No. 6 as its response herein. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: Produce any and all documents related to the medical condition ofPlaintiff at any time firing his employment with Defendant. This request specifically includes, but is expressly not limited to, any and all x-rays, x-ray reports, medical notes and/or medical records of any kind, including annual physical forms. -8- RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. EvicL 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: Produce any and all documents that indicate and/or refer to in any way a decision and/or discourse related to ceasing the use of asbestos-containing products on Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -9- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the pan of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: Produce any and all specifications, blue prints, documents, memoranda and/or other writings that reflect and/or demonstrate in the form of a pan and/or chan the location and dimensions of all car(s) and/or engine(s), locomotives roundhouses and/or shops upon which and the vicinity ofwhich Plaintiff worked and specifically including, but not limited to, the location and/or placement, repair, installation and/or use of asbestos-containing products at any tine within the last thirty-five (35) years on the railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession which in any way depict the existence of asbestos-containing -10- products. Defendant has previously produced a schematic and hand-drawn blueprint of the Friscati storehouse and Friscati shops, respectively. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11: Produce any photographs ofasbestos products in place or asbestos products being used, fabricated and/or utilized on Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, and limited to the Friscati shops and the storehouse where plaintiff worked, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: Produce any actual warning signs or photographs of warning signs or other statements in place at any time relating to asbestos-containing products [in place] at any time during the last thirty-five (35) years on Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. -11- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13: Produce any documents which indicate in any way that individuals claimed injury to their lungs as a result ofexposure to asbestos on any of Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. I66b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. l66b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. -12- Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that, as indicated in its answers to interrogatories, it began receiving claims alleging asbestos related injuries. To date, plaintiff's claim is the only claim it has received related to the Friscati shops or the storehouse at Porter Yard from anyone other than plaintiffs represented by plaintiffs' counsel. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14: produce any documents, minutes or other notes or records from any meetings at which the hazards and/or potential hazards of asbestos were discussed by officers, agents, and/or employees of Defendant. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R Civ. P. 166b(3)(d); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents other than those protected by the attorney-client or work product privilege. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15: Produce any and all documents, including invoices, shipping receipts, bills of lading, purchase orders, or other documents of a similar nature related to the purchase of asbestos-containing products for use on Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party - 13- communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. Further, defendant shall make available for inspection and photocopying on August 21,1997, the April 29,1987 deposition of O. O. Albritton, employee of Illinois Central Railroad Company from 1918 to 1968 and Director of Purchasing and Stores from 1947 to 1968. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16: Produce any and all documents reflecting in any way any inspections by labor inspector, insurance company inspectors or anyone from Defendant's company or hired by Defendant where asbestos-containing products were being used or installed and that included the taking or measure of "dust counts." This request specifically includes any and all of Defendant's's railroad(s) and railway car(s) and/or engine(s) and/or locomotive(s) and/or roundhouse(s) or shops during the last thirty-five (35) years. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -14- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not have possession of any such documents. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17: In the event that Defendant performed or had performed any dust level counts with respect to asbestos dust on any ofits railroads, produce any documents that in any way reflect or discuss the results of such studies or counts and actions, or potential actions, if any, taken as a result of such counts or studies. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its response to the previous request. -15- REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18: Please provide all documents referred to on answering Plaintiffs interrogatories propounded to the Defendant, identifying with specificity which documents were used to answer which interrogatories. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount ofrime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has produced all documents described in its answers to interrogatories. REQUEST EORPRODUCTION NO. 19: (l) Please provide a curriculum vitae for each and every expert witness or expert that the Defendant has retained or employed and cannot unequivocally state will not be a witness on its behalf at trial; and (2) with respect to any and all expert witness(es) identified in subpart (1), please provide any and all documents or tangible things including, but not limited to, all tangible reports, drawings, charts, exhibits, physical models, compilations of data, factual observations, tests, calculations, photographs, diagrams, sketches, movies, videotapes and tape recordings, opinions, supporting data and other documents and/or things reviewed and/or relied upon by him or her in formulating his or her opinions and conclusions on this case, including all learned treatises (texts, articles, studies, monographs, etc.) and consultant expert work product which forms the basis, in whole or in part, of the witness(es)' opinions or which he or she believes substantiates ro corroborates his or her conclusions regarding this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to -16- answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. I66b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that all curriculum vitae and records which form the basis ofthe opinions of its experts have been produced or are in the possession of plaintiffs. Defendant continues to object to production of articles and treatises and consultant information as protected by the work product privilege. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20: As to alio such potential legal entities who are not now a party to this lawsuit, but who may be responsible for the incident in question, please provide: A. All documents tending to establish such liability, and, B. A list of all tangible witnesses or things that may be reviewed tending to establish such liability, along with their location and the identity ofthe person to contact you view such tangible things. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance morion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. -17- Defendant feather objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that the only "potential legal entities" who "may be responsible for the incident" who are not parties to this lawsuit are limited to plaintiffs smoking. Defendant has no documents in its possession identifying any ofthese entities. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21: Provide a copy of each policy of liability insurance intended to provide coverage to the Defendant, its agents and/or employees for liability on the date in question for allegations such as those delineated in Plaintiffs Original Complaint (and all amended complaints thereafter) including, but not limited to, all primary and excess policies covering the Defendant on the date in question, indicating the name and address of each carrier. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates a preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its answer to interrogatory No. 3. These binders are available for inspection on August 21,1997, or any other reasonably convenient time. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22: Provide a copy of all invoices, purchase orders, agreements, contracts correspondences, telefaxes, and/or documents of any type ofpassing between this Defendant and any other entity regarding the acquisition, ordering, purchasing, supplying, removal or distribution ofasbestos-containing products by Defendant during the time period Plaintiff was employed by Defendant. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(d); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. -18- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the pan of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states: None known of. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23: Provide a copy of all documents form which your present net worth may be ascertained. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. -19- Such information could only be relevant to the issue of punitive damages, which are not requested or recoverable in this action. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that its 1996 Annual Report has been produced. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: Provide a copy of all photographs, diagrams, videotapes, slides and/or movie film ofDefendant's's railroad(s), owned or operated by Defendant including, but specifically not limited to the engine room, boiler room, common areas, living quarters, railroads, roundhouses, shops, locomotives, or transport cars. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not have possession of any such documents relating to the Friscati shops or the storehouse at Porter Yard other than previously produced. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25: by the Defendant relating to the Plaintiff. Provide a copy ofall medical records obtained RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party -20- communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that such documents are available for inspection at any reasonable time. Defendant further states that the only such documents it has in its possession relate to medical providers identified by plaintiff in discovery, or from experts which have been previously produced. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26: Provide a copy of all documents including but not limited to invoices, purchase orders, agreements and contracts involving Defendant as a result of the transport, use, installation, repair, replacement, removal and/or applying of asbestos- containing products on the railroad. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. I66b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R, Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -21 - Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not have in its possession any such documents related to any ofits facilities in Mobile, Alabama, where plaintiffworked REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 27: Provide a copy of all documents regarding safety, safety training and/or safety meetings provided to or for the benefit of Plaintiff and other railroad workers to asbestos or asbestos-containing products on the railroad Include any documents given out at such safety meetings and copies ofthe minutes ofor notes from all safety meetings held for the benefit ofthe employees or crew members that worked on the railroad in the last thirty-five (35) years. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. Defendant does have in its possession Safety Rules dated -22- (1) August 1, 1931 (revised September 16, 1940); (2) January 1, 1946; (3) February 1, 1956; (4) April 15,1966; (5) February 23,1973; (6) January 1,1978; and (7) December 1, 1994, which will be made available for inspection and copying on August 20,1997. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28: Provide a copy of all Defendant's safety and policy manuals regarding the use of or exposure to asbestos-containing products from 1930 to the present RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. For defendant's safety rules, see defendant's response to the previous request. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29: Provide a copy ofall personnel files maintained by Defendant and/or any agent ofDefendant concerning the Plaintiffincluding but not limited to all earnings files, administrative files, and any files concerning any physical examination conducted by the Defendant or for the benefit of the Defendant regarding Plaintiff either for hiring purposes, screening purposes or otherwise. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, -23- Tex. R. Civ. P. l66b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. Defendant has previously produced a copy ofplaintiffs release of claims. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30: Provide a copy of all reports, investigations, transcripts, memoranda, correspondence and/or documents of any type you received from, or sent to any city, county, state, or federal entity, including but not limited to the EPA, NIOSH, NIEHS or OSHA regarding either the potential health hazards or dangers associated with exposure to asbestos- containing products or airborne asbestos, and/or regarding any surveys, testing or other actions taken to determine the presence of and concentration of airborne asbestos on such of Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -24- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not possess any such documents related to the Friscati shops or the storehouse at Porter Yard where plaintiff worked. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 31: Provide a copy of all safety inspection or site inspection records referencing in any way asbestos or asbestos-containing products used on Defendant's railroad(s). RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not possess any such documents releated to the Friscati shops or the storehouse at Porter Yard where plaintiff worked. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 32: Provide a copy of all Defendant's safety inspection policies and procedures in effect during the time Plaintiff was employed by Defendant regarding the handling of, application, use or exposure to asbestos-containing products. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege. -25- Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not possess any such documents. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 33: Provide a copy of any and all photographs or video recordings, sketches, drawings, or pictures in Defendant's custody or control or that ofyour attorneys, or of any agent or representative of you or your attorney, whether made as part of the reports of experts or made by you, your attorney, or persons acting as your agents or representatives, and pertaining to any Defendant's railroad(s), including, but not limited to, locomotives, engine rooms, boiler rooms, railyards, roundhouses, shops and common areas, concerning any asbestos* containing products in those areas. Request is hereby made for one print of each photographs or video recording produced in response to this request. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. I66b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -26* Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not possess any such documents related to the Friscati shops or the storehouse at Porter Yard where plaintiff worked. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NQ, 3.4: Produce a copy of any reports prepared by any person you plan to call as an expert witness at the time of trial which pertain to the incident made the basis of this suit, specifically including all factual observations and opinions of consulting experts, if such consulting expert's opinion forms the basis ofany opinions, theories, or conclusions reached by any testifying experts, and any accompanying photographs, drawings, charts, models, video recordings or their visual aids to such reports. If any expert has not prepared a written report, or ifthe information mentioned above has not been complied into report form, then request is hereby made that each expert made a written report containing all said information and that each report be produced for inspection and copying. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request to the extent that it seeks to require Defendant to create documents) not yet in existence. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that all expert reports have been previously produced. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 35: Any and all documents prepared by, delivered to, or in the possession ofany person you plan to call as an expert witness at the time ofthe trial, or who won't be called as a witness but whose work product forms a basis in whole or in part of an expert who will be called to testify, which related to any fact or matter that is the subject ofor related to the subject of this suit. -27- RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Subject to and without waiving its previously riled objection, defendant asserts that all documents in its possession that were provided to any experts relating to this action have been produced. All documents prepared by its experts relating to this action have been produced. Defendant's experts could have a myriad of documents which would touch tangentially on issues in this case, such as medical articles and related documents, which are not specifically identified with this particular action or this defendant, production of such documents to which defendant continues to object. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO, 36: All witness statements or other documents generated or obtained in any investigations into the asbestos exposure made the basis ofthis lawsuit whether signed or unsigned. If you content any such document is privileged, please identify specifically each document withheld, along with the specific privilege asserted. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly board and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents in its possession. The substance of its conversation with Mr. Whisenhant has been previously disclosed. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 37: Any models, visual aids, experiments, documents or other writings or any items of demonstrative evidence prepared or preserved by you, your attorney, your experts, or any other person acting on your behalf that will be used in the trial of this lawsuit. -28- RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not intend to use any models or perform any experiments at trial. Blow-ups of a document as well as medical related items may be used at trial. Documentary evidence has been previously identified by all parties to this action. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 38: Please provide curriculum vitae for all expert witnesses that Defendant intends to consult or call as witnesses at the trial of this case. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex, R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that with respect to expert witnesses it intends to call at trial, all such documents have been produced. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 39: Copies of all depositions of any person previously employed by you specifically including, but not limited to Defendant or Defendant's employees, representatives, or agents, taken in connection with any alleged asbestos exposure at Defendant's railroad(s). -29- RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents relating to any employee who worked at the Friscati shops or the storehouse at Porter Yard. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 40: Provide a copy of each and every document (including ail reports, memos, photographs, statements and any material collected or acquired ofany investigation, and all correspondence between Defendant and Defendant's insurer, and any reports, notes or any other documents regarding testing, examinations, inspection, or opinions related in any way to asbestos or any other communication from any individual or entity to Defendant, Defendant's insurer or any agent or representative ofDefendant or Defendant's insurer concerning this incident or any injuries or disabilities allegedly resulting therefrom) in Defendant's possession or control, or that of Defendant's insurer, health insurer, disability insurer, liability insurer, or other insurer, relating to Defendant's claim or the investigation ofthis incident by Defendant, Defendant's insurer, or any individual or entity engaged for such a purpose. RESPONSE*. Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. -30- Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 41: Provide a copy of all accident, injury or illness reports concerning the Plaintiffprepared by and/or for Plaintiffs' employees) and/or agents in the general course of business. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it does not have possession of any such documents. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 42: Provide copies of any and all safety standards, regulations, rules or codes pertaining in any way to asbestos or inhalation of toxic fumes or substances, whether promulgated by government or private industry, or Plaintiffs employer from 1930 to the present. -31 - RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents other than those previously identified or produced by any party to this action or those having force oflaw which are equally accessible to plaintiff. With respect to this particular case, defendant specifically refers to 45 U.S.C. 51 etseq. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION_NO._43: Provide a copy of any and all contracts and/or agreements of any kind (if oral, reduce the agreement to writing) made by Defendant to supply masks and/or other safety equipment to the Plaintiff or any other employees or railroad workers. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, -32- beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. However, to the extent that responsive, non-privileged documents related to jurisdictional issues were so used, they will be made available for inspection and copying at a mutually agreeable time and place. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its previous correspondence specifically referencing this request REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 44: Provide copies of any and all documentation evidencing Defendant's compliance with the Boiler Inspection Act, formerly U.S.C. 20701, during the last thirty-five (35) years. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. -33- REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 45: Provide copies ofany and all documentation which in any way relates to the transport by Defendant's railroad(s) of asbestos-containing products. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(a); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount oftime and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant states that it has no such documents relating to any of its facilities in Mobile, Alabama. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 46: Provide a copy of all documents, reports and other material identified in Answer to Request No. 12. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same, Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(c); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3)(d); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery ofadmissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore. -34- beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part ofDefendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its response to request No. 12 as its response herein. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 47: Please produce any and all x-rays, MRIs, CT-scans, videotapes, or other electronically or technologically created representations, depictions, picturizations, imaging or imagery collected by Defendant in the course of discovery. RESPONSE: Subject to Defendant's special appearance and without waiving same. Defendant hereby incorporates its preliminary statement and general objections. Defendant further objects to answering this request for the reason that it is overly broad and because of its breadth seeks information and matters privileged pursuant to the mental impression and work product privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xa); the witness statement exemption, Tex. R. Civ. P. 166b(3Xc); the party communications privilege, Tex. R. Civ. P. 16db(3Xd); and the lawyer/client privilege, Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 503. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence related to Defendant's jurisdictional contacts, if any, with the State of Texas and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery while Defendant has a Special Appearance motion pending. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it does not limit itself to a reasonable time period as related to the issues in this case, and is, therefore, beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Defendant further objects to this request for the reason that it is overly broad, burdensome, harassing and would require an unreasonable amount of time and expense on the part of Defendant to compile. Subject to and without waiving its previously filed objection, defendant incorporates its response to request No. 25 as its response herein. Defendant further states that x-rays obtained from -35- plaintiffs counsel have been returned. Any x-rays taken by defendant's examining physician shall be provided upon reasonable request -36- CHARLIE BETHEL, etal., vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP.,etal. NO. 96-06238-A IN THE DISTRICT COURT DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned attorney certifies that a copy of the foregoing Defendant Illinois Central Railroad Company's Supplemental Responses and Objections to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production Subject to and Without Waiving Special Appearance to Present Motion Objecting to Jurisdiction was faxed to the below-listed counsel on August 20,1997, and was also deposited in a mail box located near 5000 West Main Street, Belleville, Illinois, with proper postage prepaid at approximately 5:00 p.m. on August 20,1997 addressed to the following: Ms. Kimberly Shauck (Fax: 214-520-1181) Baron & Budd, P.C. 3102 Oak Lawn Ave., Suite 1100 Dallas, TX 75219 GUNDLACH, LEE, EGGMANN, BOYLE & ROESSLER 5000 West Main St, Box 23560 Belleville, IL 62223-0560 (618) 277-9000 (618) 277-4594 FAX CHARLIE BETHEL, et al., vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP., et al. NO. 96-06238-A IN THE DISTRICT COURT DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Mel Bailey DeHay & Elliston, LLP 717 North Harwood, Suite 1500 Dallas, TX 75201 David A. Livingston Livingston & Markie 55 Waugh Drive, Suite 1200 Houston, TX 77007 B. Bradley Dickenson Vial, Hamilton, Koch & Knox 1717 Main Street, Suite 4400 Dallas, TX 75201 Thomas Dougall Bowers, Orr & Robertson 1401 Main Street, Suite 1100 Columbia, SC 29201 Debra S. Fitzgerald Crouch & Hallett 717 North Harwood, Suite 1400 Dallas, TX 75201 James T. Foley Foley & Colley 404 First Place Tyler, TX 75702 SERVICE LIST Richard L. Forman Forman, Perry, Watkins & Krutz One Jackson Place, Suite 1200 Jackson, MS 39201 Kathy Hermes DeHay & Elliston 717 North Harwood, Suite 1500 Dallas, TX 75201 John L. Hill, Jr. Liddell, Sapp 3300 Texas Commerce Tower Houston, TX 77002 Beth McGregor Bean & Manning 5847 San Felipe, Suite 1500 Houston, TX 77057 Stan McMurry Locke Purnell Rain Harrell 2200 Ross Ave., Suite 2200 Dallas, TX 75201-6776 W. Neil Rambin Strasburger & Price, LLP 901 Main Street, Suite 4300 Dallas, TX 75202 Robert Thackston Jenkens & Gilchrist 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 3200 Dallas, TX 75202 Susan M. Hull Jenkens & Gilchrist 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 3200 Dallas, TX 75202 Michael J. Truncale Orgain, Bell & Tucker 470 Orleans Street Beaumont, TX 77701 Stephen S. Livingston Thompson & Knight 1700 Pacific Ave., Suite 3300 Dallas, TX 75201 William J. Skepnek Skepnek & Maddox 900 Massachusetts, Suite 601 Lawrence, KS 66044 James Harris Harris & Lively 550 Fannin, Suite 845 Beaumont, TX 77701 A1 Conant, Jr. Conant Whittenburg French & Schachter 600 North Pearl, Suite 2300 Dallas, TX 75201 Charles Green Cowles & Thompson 901 Main Street, Suite 4000 Dallas, TX 75202-3693 James M. Riley, Jr. Coats, Rose, Yale, Holm, Ryman & Lee 1001 Fannin, Suite 800 Houston, TX 77002 2