Document jyGVkq1mmr12v238QjjjpXEdR

FILE NAME: Dana (DAN) DATE: 2012 DOC#: DAN011 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Motion and Exhibits from Stuckart vs. AC&S pana coman es m o n o n i m \iA N T S T t l C K A l T /. A c * s * . <w t ** 1 [EVEN M. HAROWITZ (Bar No. 71117) Lrowitz@htlawoffices.com 2 ATHERINE Y. WANG (Bar No. 215663) 3 ang@htlawoffiC6S.com ARAHE. GILSON (Bar No. 260263) 4 1 son@htlawoffices.com ' AROWITZ & TIGERMAN, LLP 5 50 Sansome Street. 3rd Floor an Francisco, California 94111 6 elephone (415) 788-1588 7 ,ttomey for Plaintiffs 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO IC 11 OROTHY STUCKART, Individually and as 12 uccessor-in-Interest to KEVIN STUCKART, cccdent; THEODORE STUCKART; 12 ACHEL STUCKART; and DOES ONE 1* irough TEN, inclusive Plaintiffs, li v. 1< AC and S, INC., et al, Defendants. Case No.: CGC-09-275304 PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION; PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE ATV.TT' HAMA nniVTP ANT1T.S LLC'S SEPARATE-STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS; PLAINTIFFS' SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE; DECLARATION OF SARAH E. GILSON IN SUPPORT THEREOF Date: Time: Dept.: Judge: August 7, 2012 9:30 a.m. 503 Hon. Teri L. Jackson Trial Date:- September 17,2012 PLAINTIFFS' OPP TO DEF DANA'S MSA 1 2 I. 3 I 4 5 6 7 IL 8 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION...................................................... ......... 1 A. Plaintiffs' Discovery Is Factually Rich As T'Dana's ....1 Punitive Damages. ...,.l A Triable Issne Exists As T . Dana's Liability For Punitive Damages B. TheR e,evan,Defendant Is ^ C o p i e s , ILC ...... , C. On Its "Divisions" Is ANon Seqmtur........................... ............................... 4 STATEMENT OF FACTS............................................... Is Not Factually Devoid And Dana Has N ot..............^ Plaintiffs' Discovery Shifted Its Burden Of Production........... 10 11 12 I B. f And Did Not Warn Con.un.ers !. Dana (And All Its Divisions)'* Knowledge......... 2. Dana (And All Its Divisions)'*Failure to Warn ...................5 .5 ,.8 13 I The Relevant Defendant Is Dana And Dana's .... 9 C. Is ANonSequitur................ -........................... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 III. 22 23 24 25 26 27 1. Victor Brand Gaskets........................................ Decedent Was Exposed To A Multitude 0 Dana Is Liable................................................ a. Victor Gaskets. b. Spicer Clutches e. Dana Axles...... ............. 10 ............ 12 ............. 12 .............. 13 LEGAL ARGUMENT T TV a ,,in; A. Plaintiffs' Discovery Is Punitive Damages And Dana Has w As To Dana'sLiability For shifted Its Burden....................... 13 su 1. Plaintiffs' Discovery Is Factually Divisions of Dana...................... *..................` ............14 2. Piaintiffs' Discovery IsFactuaily As T . The A c t ^ ^ g At Issue................................................... B. D a m a g e s .........................' .................. ....... i s 1 2 3 IV. 4 5 6 7 !. Knowledge Of Dana's Divisions Is Imputed To The Corporation ^^ As A W hole......................................................... 2. Dana Knew Of The Hazards Of Asbestos And Consumers For Decades..................................... ............................ ................... 18 CONCLUSION.................................. .......................................... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 table of authorities Page 1 ! k; 2 Cases 3 ..... 13,14 Aguilar , Mande Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cd. 4 826.843, 849 ........ ........ 4 ........... 14 A,,dm rs v. Foster Wheeler U C (2006) 138 CalApp. 4* 96.104-106)........ 5 ......17, 18 6 Bankheads. AruinMeritor, 205 Cal.App.4th 68, 85 (2012)........................... ............ 17 Boeken , Phillip Morris Inc. (2005) 127 Cal.App.40t 1640, 1690............... 7 ..2, 6, 8, 16 Brown, Michael etal. . Honeywell International Inc., el al (2010).......... S 9 ' Davidson Burns International Services Carp., ( 0 3 ...................... ...............5, 14 SFSC CaseNo. 429088..................................... .................. 17 10 Grimshaw . Ford Motor Company, 119 Cal.App.3d 757,808-810 (1981) 11 ................... 17 m uardv. A H. Kohins Co, .48 Cal. App. 34 374, 398 (Ct App. 1983)... .................... 14 12 McConnell Kaiser Gypsum Co. (2002) 98 Cal App.4* 1098.................. .......... 16 13 people V. Fores, E. Olson, Inc., 137 Cal.App.3d 137,140 (Ct. App. 1982. 14 Toma v. Abex Corporation, et al. (2003) Q24 ,, 5 , 14 15 l m e d a County Superior Court Ko. RG- 03083024 .....13 ofLos Angeles (1995) 31 Cal. App. 4lil 573, 585 16 Union Bank v. Superior Cour .17 Codes and Statutes 18 19 Cal. Civ. Code 2332.............. 20 Cal. Civil Code 3294(a)......... 21 ' Cal. Civ. Code 3294(c)(l)..... 22 Cal. Civ. Code 3294(c)(3)..... 23 CCP 437(p)(2)...................... ..3,16 ..... 17 ......17 ...... 17 ....... 13 24 25 26 27 oc 1 INTRODUCTION 2 A. Plaintiffs' Discovery Is Factually Rich As To Dana's Liability For Punitive 3 Damages, 4 Plaintiffs' discovery cites to documents which prove that by the' 1960s, industrial 5 hygienists had recommended to Dana the use of special respirators for the control of asbestos dust 6 and the safety of Dana employees. In 1964 and again in 1966, Dana's Victor plant was inspected 7 by an industrial hygienist for, among other industrial contaminants, hazardous asbestos dust 8 concentrations. 9 Plaintiffs' discovery cites to documents which prove that in 1973, Dana received notice . 10 from General Motors that Dana oil pan gasket-s in their packaging were releasing unacceptable 11 - levels of asbestos dust. They requested that all Dana cartons be-vacuumed out, bagged m plastic, 12 labeled and disposed of. Dana was furthermore instructed to place a cautionary statement on their 13 cartons. 14 Plaintiffs' discovery cites io-deeuments which prove that in 1980, Dana knew that end user 15 mechanics were using wire brushes to scrape asbestos gasket material off engines. Dana knew this 16 was hazardous because as of the 1960s Dana knew that scraping off gasket material horn an 17 engine block with a wire brush would release asbestos fibers into the air. Dana-knew .that as a 18 Iresult, the end users of its products were often at a higher risk of exposure than its own employees 19 in its plants. Plaintiffs' discovery establishes that despite its actual knowledge of these 20 jhazards, Dana failed to warn the consumers of its asbestos products of the hazards therein, 21 iPlaintiffs' discovery responses are factually rich, and as such Dana hasffailed to shift its burden of 22 production on this Motion. , 23 B. A Triable Issue Exists As To Dana's Liability For Punitive Damages. 24 Assuming the above evidence is considered "factually devoid" and this Court finds Dana 25 did shift its burden of production, Plaintiffs' evidence presented here raises a triable issue as to 26 Dana's liability for punitive damages. 27 / / / 28 / / / ' -- --------- --------- ~ ~ ~ - 1- _ _ _ _ _ _ _____________________ ____________ PLAINTIFFS' OPP TO DEF DANA'S MSA ~ ' 1 All of Dana's relevant divisions admit in discovery that "pleural plaques and thickening, 2 sbestosis, lung cancer in association with asbestos, and mesothelioma were all causally 3 ssociated with exposure to certain t57pes of asbestos fiber and levels of exposure as of the 1960s." 4 As early as 1964, Dana was receiving warnings about asbestos from asbestos suppliers. 5 ohns-Manville, a supplier of raw asbestos to Dana, put warning labels on their packages of 6 isbestos sent to Dana's factories starting in 1964; however Dana did not relay those warnings onto 7 ts asbestos products. 8 Dana's PMK admits that by 1968, Dana knew that inhalation of asbestos fibers could cause 9 lisease By 1971, Dana (and all its relevant divisions) had received notice of a worker's 10 compensation claim against Dana for an asbestos-related injury by former-employee Clarence 11 12 Dana's corporate representative-admitted that if a company has knowledge of a hazard 13 such as asbestos, and if its products created a hazard, the-company would be expected to pass on 14 such knowledge to the end users of its products. 15 Nevertheless, Dana never printed the word "asbestos" on any of its actual gaskets, even 1C though it was known to Dana that end users of the gaskets would regularly encounter the material 17 outside its packaging installed in an engine. Dana only placed a caution on the packaging of 18 "certain" of its gaskets in 1984. Dana "may have" placed a warning tag on certain Spicer/Dana IS axle assemblies it sold with brakes attached starting in 1985. Dana never placed any warnings 2C on its Spicer clutches, on the products themselves or on their packaging. 21 DanaisJPerson Most Knowledgeable for its Victor gasket division and product line, 21 Marcella Duncan, was deposed in Michael Brown, e1 al v. Honeywell International Inc., et al in 21 2010. Ms. Duncan testified that although Victor manufactured asbestos-containing gaskets 2i through June of 1988, it sold asbestos-containing gaskets through 1990. Ms. Duncan admitted that 2: had Dana not-continued to sell the remainder of its asbestos gasket inventory after June of 1988, 2< Dana would have lost money. 2' /// 2 :/// -2PLAINTIFFS' OPP TO DEF DANA'S MSA I V TM forthepurposeofmaxitoriaSI" ' : CO i punitive aamae disregardedtheheaithands^ ^ Kevin Stuckart. 1 c T h eM asals s m ^ M o m J ^ J -- - Tliere is no difference between eorporat-- ss of asbestos hazards 1 ^ ^^ * have ,,rice of whatever divisions. "As~against a p * , p a b * * . ^ ~ - " either has notice of, and ought, tn good ^ ^ a dutg of oo-- flon -- atetodreoflrerfl ^ 1 antong corporate departments is supported bo the corporate offictals to the cotporahon self fc ` Dana's discovery responses ovetaU evj en ^ ^ ^ of Dana were no. W fflvisinffl admit discover, as fat as the flow of eotpotate knowledge ts neetne ^ ^ ^ asbestos, and t a t ..pleIal-plaqnesandthicheng.aa " ^ me t0 certain Wpos of asbestos fiber and 1mesothelioma were all causally aSS ^ | ^ ^ 1 , V isio n s received notice of the same 1971 lewls ,, f exposure as ohe 1960s. * < * ^ ^ ,, . ,oimer Dana e m p lo y | workerls compensation claim for an as fc the words of MarcellaDunean person Most Knowledgeable, "Dana was the ^ ^ ^ ^ p r o d u c t s . " Dana | corporation, and that was the peophr ^ ^ Knowledge r f lsbestos hazards IC"m',anieS' D' ,e ^ ' "l X o u l o u t t h e 60s, 1970s and 1980s, and ts chatged wtth the i developed by its many a waming detailing same for decades. damages here. g ^ IiB Lm IS . ...... A w .h iat& 1p u ^ o v a j J = a tt H f i B ia .------------- - g Mj e a OLProdicBg!ii Compames Knowledge of o ^ to e w d en c e w H o M o cn n .e n .sD a n P the hazards of asbestos. v>Q7nw?-s of asbestos decades "Dana ^ ^ s V e i p ^ ' t o asbestos via Y ^ T ^astoffiedby m before Mr. Stuck;n P g arry Castleman, m i973hlinacceptable levels of the attached dedar ^ ^ c D,vision that there were ^ the Dana the General ^ ot ^ est0prene' oil pan S f ket\ ^ ' e Sidue out of-the shipping asbestos dust on vees were ordered to vaC? . bag(ied in plastic, Corporation. GM empi . The residue was to be agb ^ kbel the cartons before dispo g ^ inspector further reque q SHA asbestos labeled, nSV 5 -5 - So^and ye, H * to additional 0964); ! 972>; D-ANA C O R P O R A * Intra-Company Common,oatton ( A ^ 1973); .-.T* CORPORATION Intra-Company Communication re. = i b earin g ^ ten a^ eb m ao ^ ^ attached. 5ST ' 28 H ^ T f f F S TW r O E F D A ^ S MSA  Deposition of Thomas Joseph Zagurski (.Davidson v. Burns International Services Corp., et al., SFSC Case No. 429088), August 11,2004. Defendant was present at this deposition, making this deposition equally available. Deposition of Marcella Leigh Duncan (Victor/Dana Sales Operation Manager 1968+) (Toma v. Abex Corporation, et al, Alameda County Superior Court No. RG- 03083024), June 16,2003. (See Plaintiffs' Responses to Dana's Special Interrogatory No. 34, attached as Exhibit C to 6 the Declaration of Michelle Clowser in support of Dana's Motion for Summary Adjudication.) 7 1 B Plaintiffs' Evidence Shows Dana (And Ah Its Divisions) Knew Of The Hazards 8 || Of Asbestos And Did Not Warn Consumers Thereof. 9 || 1. Dana fAnd All Its Divisions!'s Knowledge. 10 II Dana's Person Most Knowledgeable for its Victor gasket division and product line, 11 Marcella Duncan, was deposed in Michael Brown, et al. v. Honeywell International, Inc., et al. m 12 2010. (See Deposition of Marcella Duncan, Michael Brown, -et al. v. Honeywell International, 13 Inc., et a l, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit A.) Ms. Duncan testified that Victor produced 14 gaskets predominantly for automobiles, trucks and some heavy duty applications. (Id at 22:14 15 16 I19; 23:3-10.) As of 1946, Dana knew that injury to the health ofemployees and the public could be 17 caused by asbestos. (Id, at 90:10-19.) Dana's corporate headquarters was based in Ohio since 18 1928. (Id. at 88:9-12.) As an Ohio corporation Dana had a duty to follow the laws and 19 regulations ofthe State of Ohio. (Id at 88:13-16.) hi 1946 th e Ohio Department of Health issued 20 legal requirements for the prevention and control of industrial public health hazards, which 21 included harmful exposure to asbestos dust. (Id at 89:5-16; 90:18-23.) As an Ohio corporation 22 Dana had notice of these regulations, and the warnings about exposure to asbestos dust. (Id at 23 90:25-91:19.) 24 1Dana h a s 's e ^ d m t k their Motion "Objections to Plaintiffs' Evidence in Opposition to Defendant Dana Companies ^ 0 ofevidentiary ^objections. Moreover, Plaintiffs do not rely on the Declaration of Barry Castleman m their Opposi on, making these "Objections" both moot and glaringly premature. PLAINTIFFS' OPP TO DEF DANA'S MSA 1 By the 1960s, industrial hygienists had recommended to Dana the use of special respirators 2 he control of asbestos dust and the safety of Dana employees. (See Kemper IH Studies, 1964 3 . 1966, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit B.) In 1964 and again in 1966, Dana's Victor 4 4 was inspected by an. industrial hygienist on behalf of Kemper Insurance. (Id.) The plant was 5 mined for, among other industrial contaminants, asbestos dust concentrations. (14) "Victor 6 demented dust control measures at its manufacturing plant, including requiring employees to 7 * respiratory masks. (See Deposition of Marcella Duncan, Michael Brown, et al v. Honeywell 8 ,,national, Inc., et ah at 106:15-107:20, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit V.) 9 All of Dana's relevant divisions admit in discovery that "pleural plaquemand thickening, 1C icstosis, lung cancer in association with asbestos, and mesothelioma were all causally 11 lociated with exposure to certain types of asbestos fiber and levels of exposure as of the 1960s." i; * Dana Companies LLC (Spicer Clutch D ivision's 2009 Supplemental Responses to GO 129 i: iction Interrogatories at 25:26-28, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit C; seejdso Dana impanies LLC (Spicer Axle Division)'s 2009 Responses to Standard GO 129 Friction terrogatories, at 25:10-12, attache**) the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit D; seealso Dana Companies X (Victor Gasket Division's 2009 Amended Responses to GO 129 Standard Interrogatories at [:8-ll, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit E.) As early as 1964, Dana was receiving warnings about asbestos from asbestos suppliers. lee Deposition of Marcella Duncan, Michael Brown, C d v. th n e ^ d U d e r n m m d , Inc.. Cal. , 128:3-129:11, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit A.) Johns-Manville, a supplier of raw sbestos to Dana, put warning labels on their packages of asbestos sent to Dana's factories starting , 1964; however Dana did not relay those warnings onto its asbestos products. (Id.) Dana's PMK admits that by 1968, Dana knew that inhalation of asbestos abets could cause lisease. (Mr at 107:23-108:12.) By 1971, Dana (and all its relevant divisions) had received lotrce of a worker's compensation claim against Dana for an asbestos-related injury by former unployee Clarence Hankins. (Id. at 108:21-109:1; seealso Dana Companies LLC (Spicer Clutch D,vision)'s2009 Supplemental Responses to GO 129 Friction Interrogatories al 17:14-18:1, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit C; seealso Dana Companies LLC (Spicer Axle PLAINTIFFS' OPP TO DEF DANA'S MSA 1 D ivision's 2009 Responses to Standard GO 129 Friction Interrogatories, at 19:19-21, attached to 2 the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit D.) 3 In 1973, Dana received notice from General Motors that Dana oil pan gaskets in their 4 r ^ t- aoinc. were releasing onacceptable levels of asbestos dost (Id at 136:25-138:16; s e e d 5 Intra-Company Commonication dated April 25, 1973, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit F.) 6 They requested that all Dana cartons be vacuumed out, bagged in plastic, labeled and disposed of. 7 (Id se e a to Intra-Company Communication dated April 25,1973, attached to the Oilson Decl. as 8 Exhibit F.) Dana was furthermore instmcted to place a cautionary statement on their cartons. (4 9 seedso Intra-Company Communication dated April 25,1973, attached to the Gilson Decl, as 10 Exhibit F.) 11 In 1980, the head of engineering for Dana's Victor division, John Zeitz, wrote an article 12 entitled "What Will Replace Asbestos Gaskets." (Id. at 111:15-112:23, seealso What Will 13 Replace Asbestos Gaskets", attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit G.) 14 The article stated: , 4 One problem for all suppliers and users of asbestos products us how t 15 end user disposes of the product: In the gasket business this is a particularly sensitive are?a because often the end user finds himself using a wire brush o 16 scraper to scrape asbestos off of an engine p art to clean up residue .gasketing. P Unfortunately, it is the asbestos you cannot see th at finds its way m 17 the lungs. So unless special preventative health procedures are followed, the end 18. u ser7 asb esto s gaskets m aybe in more potential danger that the personnel 19 m the P[ A s ^ t L Ssupplia-s] state very simply that once the materialreache^ consumer, the asbestos is locked-in by the various processes used m manufacture. 20 Granted this may be true, but it is very' difficult for most gasket suppliers to 21 ^ T t h i s condition continues throughout the use of the product when they consider the asbestos-contained material is typically sheared, m rn^ 22 calendared, scraped, sanded, punched, burned, formed, compressed and around it its further manufacture and use as a gasket. 23 Asbestos seems to be used in the majority' of cylinder head app matrons and intake manifold applications, exhaust manifold applications and a large 24 number of extremely heavily loaded flanges. 25 ( I d seealso "What Will Replace Asbestos Gaskets", attached to the Gilson Decl. as 26 27 Exhibit G.) 28 -7^L^JNTIFFS' o pp TO D EFDANA'SM S 1 Dana knew that to install its gasket a mechanic would necessarily have to remove a gasket 2 it. (Id. at 119:19-25.) Dana knew that end user mechanics were using wire brushes to scrape 3 >estos gasket material off engines. Qch at 113:14-19.) Dana knew this was hazardous because as 4 the 1960s Dana knew that scraping off gasket material from an engine block with a wire brush 5 mid release asbestos fibers into the ah. (Id at 118:1-119:8.) Dana knew that the end users of 6 products were often at a higher risk of exposure than its own employees in its plants. (Id at 7 .3:3-13.) Despite its actual knowledge of these hazards, Dana never tested its own gaskets for 8 Der release of asbestos. (Id. at 120.5-12.) c Although Dana manufactured asbestos-containing gaskets through June-of 1988, it sold 1( bestos-eontaining gasketsihrough 1990. (Id at 75:15-76:7.) Ms. Duncan admitted that had i: -anamot continued to sell the remainder of its asbestos gasketinventory after June of 1988, Dana i: rould have lost money. (Id at 78:5-l 1.) i: 2, Dana (And All Its Divisions)'s Failure to Wain. Dana did not place any warnings concerning asbestos on its gasket packaging until 1984 5. (Id at 138:25-139:10.) Dana's corporate representative admitted that if a company has knowledge of a hazard nch as asbestos, and if its products created a-hazard, the company would be expected to pass on ;uch knowledge to the end users of rts products, (!d at 92:22-93:7.) The "caution label" finally Placed on "certain gaskets and gasket materials" said "substantially" "CAUTION. CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS. AVOID CREATING DUST. BREATHING ASBESTOS DUST MAY CAUSE SERIOUS BODILY HARM." (See Dana Corporation (Victor Gasket Division) 2005 mended Responses to GO 129 Standard Interrogatories, at 34:18-22, attached to the Gilson Deck s Exhibit H.) Dana never printed the word "asbestos" on any of its actual gaskets, even though it /as known to Dana that end users of the gaskets would regularly encounter the material outside its nckaging installed in an engine. (See Deposition of Marcella Duncan, Michael Brown, et al. v. ioneywell International, Inc., et a l, at 104:17-25, attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit A; see dso "What Will Replace Asbestos Gaskets", attached to the Gilson Decl. as Exhibit G.) -8- ________ PLAINTIFFS' OP? TO DEF DANA'S MSA Dana "may have" placed a warning Tag on certain Spicer/Dana axle assemblies ^ with brakes attached starting in 1985. (See Dana Companies LLC (Spicer Axle Dmsion) ^ Responses to Standard GO 129 Friction Interrogatories, at 48:10-49:5, attached to t e son on their paekaging. (Se e Dana Compam'eTs LILPC T(SSpoieceerr CClluuttcchh Division1)^ 2009 Supplemental Responses to GO 129 Friction Interrogatories at 49:28-50:2, attached to the r son ec . Non Seguitar, ^ C m tt sm lM iB iC E B a GLjSatsSkKeCtlsS. Dana Corapaniehbegan as Spicer Manufacturing Corporation in 1916, and change! its p name to Dana ation in 1946 (See Dana Companies LLC (Spicer Clutch Di\ sion ^ toterrogatones at 19:7-9, ahached ,0 doe Gilson Deol. Dana made asbestos-containing Spicer Clutches through 1983. (Id) Dana formed its Industria Vi iq 70s fid at 19-27-20:6.) Dana sold asbestos-containing Power Transmission Division m the 1970s. 0 4 * 1 9 . 2 / ; industrial ciurches and couplings through at leas. 1991. 0 Dana fonnedlts Spicer Axle Division in the early 1950s. (I4 a tl9 .1 3 ^ ^ ) asbestos-containing Spicer Axle components through the 1990s. (S i) 21 Dana formed its Victor Gasket Division in 1967. (See Dana Companies LLC (V Gasket Division's 2009 Amended Responses to GO 129 Standard lnterrogato.es a , 24 gask"ts through 1988. (Id) As of 1985, only 14.7% of the gasket matonaia sold b5 Vtclet Products Division to its top 23 O.E.M: accounts comprised non-asbestos-contanung pto nc . , q i n attached to the Gilson Deci, as (See Intra-Company C om m unication Dated February 8,1985, attached Exhibit I.) -9 PIAINTIFFS' O PFfoD EFD AihVSM SA' STEVEN M. HAR0 W1TZ (Bar No. 71117) TtarnwitZ@htlaWofficCS.com CATHERINE Y. WANG (Bar No. 215663) wane@htiawofficesxoin _ SARAHE. GILSON (Bar No. 260263) gilson@htlawnffi c6S.com HAROWITZ & TIGERMAN, LLP 450 Sansome Street, 3rd Floor San. Francisco, California 94111 Telephone (415)788-1588 Attorney for Plaintiffs SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO DOROTHY STUCKART, Individually and as Successor-in-interest to KEVIN STUCKAR , Decedent; THEODORE STUCKART; RACHEL STUCKART; and DOES ONE | through TEN, inclusive Plaintiffs, v. AC and S, INC., et al, Defendants. Case No.: CGC-09-275304 m m ATi ATION OF SARAH E. GILSON IN SUPPORT^OF PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT DANA COhUANlE ffi LLC'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION Date: Time: Dept.: Judge: August 7,2012 9:30 a.m, 503 Hon. Teri L. Jackson Trial Date: September 17,2012 I SARAH E. GILSON, declare: 1 , am an attorney a, law, duly licensed to practice before all Courts in t e State of California. 1am counsel of record for Plaintiffs herein. . maXe tols Declaration of my own persona, Xnowledge, and If called upon as a witness, 1 cou,d and wouid testily competendy thereto. -1FWEiF v T S P L R fffF S ^ ^ DEF DANA'S MSA 2 Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true aud coirect copy o f exc rp D affi C o m p a ss LLC (Spicer Ciutch D iv isio n ), ,0 0 9 Suppiemeniei Responses to Friction Interrogatories. , Attached heieto as E xhibit D ,l s a correct copy , 1 C (Spicer Axle D ivision ), 2009 Responses to Standard G liana Companies LLC (bpicer / w from Interrogatories. troe and correct copy o f relevant pages from 6. Attached hereto as E xh .brtE is a hue an r o l M standard . TTC (Victor Gasket D iv isio n ), 2009 Amended Responses io GO 129 Stan Dana Companies LLC f Interrogatories. 0f Dana Intra-Company ` 7 Attached hereto as E xhibit F is a true and correct copj Communication dated April 25,1913. 8. Attached heieto as Ei?xhViiibKiitt CO iiss aa itmruce and correct co. py o ^ "What Will Replace Asbestos Gaskets. ,,a correct copy of relevant pages from 9. Attached hereto as E xhibit H is a true and correct cop) Dana C otporation, (Victor Gasket Division) 2005 Amended Responses o Interrogatories. 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy o Intra-Company communication Dated February 8,1985. u Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of exempts fr . Deposition of Chris Stuckart, Vol. I, taken March 7,2012, ia Attached heieto as E xhibit K is a true and correct copy of excerpt. 134 Attached hereto as Exhibit L 1 Deposition of Andrew Janoski, Vol. I, taken January 25,2012. 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit M is a true and collect copy of excerpts from the 1 Deposition o f Andrew Janoski, Vol. II, taken January 2 5 ,2012. 2 ,5 . Attached hereto as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy o f excerpts om 3 Deposition of Walter Mangerich, Vol. I, taken February 1,2012. 4 16, Attached hereto as E xhibit O is a true and correct copy o f the excerpts from 5 h, of Walter Mangerich, Vol. II, taken February 2,2012, g Deposition declare under penalty o f perjury under the law s o f the State o f California that e 7 1 and that this Declaration was executed on July 24,2012, a an g foregoing is true and correct, 9 Francisco, California. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3PLAINTIFFS' o pF t ODEFDANA^S MSA tyd/"1AE RKA ISO f 1 .. 2 . 3 ' 4 I 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 . 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT "A" i IK THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO Michael Brown, et al., Frank Sylvasy (Estate), et al Plaintiffs, vs. Honeywell International, Inc., 'et al., Defendants. ) C ase N o . : CV-09-702689 ) Case No.: CV-09-695277 ) JUDGE HANNA ) JUDGE SPELLACY ) ) ) ) ) Deposition of Marcy. Duncan, a ,,it,,e.s herein, * by - "PTM cross-eramnation end pursuant to the Ohio Rules ot civil Procedure and uotice as to time and place and stipulations hereinafter se.t forth, at the Residence Inn Indianapolis Korth.eet-ttarriott, seen hi oital Way, Indianapolis, IP 462701 o on Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010, 10 *00 3.IQ-/ Notary Public within before George J. Starduhar, a and for the State of Ohio. , Page 1 | f i t c h r e p o r t i n g , INC. (800) 569-7888 f33b8aff-8ee6-4321i-a057-848cW2de'l0ff P ag e 22 A Yes. Q is there a reason why you did not do that in preparation for your deposition today? ^ A I didn't know what to. took for. any given time, there were over 50,000 different gastets manufactured, and there were a lot more that were^ considered part numbers, hen you put something rn a kit, it tabes another part number to create the kr . So you may have ten gaskets in the kit sold individually as ten different pa-rt numbers and then the kit would have another nuirfcer. So you are looking at a lot of different part numbers and gasket numbers, and I didn't know what to look for. q Bid your job duties have| t rdf rraskets for automobiles or something with the sale of gaskets- rod, a__ 0 y g0 9 *---- - A It was predominantly automobiles,._ probably trucks, buses, some diesel. q i Like a C-ummins engine? A Yes, because I was wrth the aftermarket division at that time, so it would have been any gaskets that were available through Victor rn tne t-he aftermarket sales. Service Parts Division for tne art q NOW, let's just limit it down to irirwii.V'.brattAdri`Pidfcl'sdbiJ"i.'*.--........ f i t c h r e p o r t i n g , INC. (800) 569-7888 f33bBaff-8ae6^321-a057-84BcM2de10K Page 23 automobile gaskets, and in that time period, you had said earlier there were over 50,000 gaskets. ' What percentage of those gaskets were for automobile use rather than heavy equipment o r m ^ or anything like that? A ^I w_o_u_ld b__e_____gu-^e--swsaeniBBnaBgIBS.BaB Q Well, can you give me your best I i..i 111 II I' g ll W W in iW W U dJMdH JU U Ill estimate? them. Probably around 70 to 80 Perc^ ^ f A " . , "'h.i. wZrp sold from the Very, few of the gaskets Jihat were . _ . Aftermarket were tor heavy-duty applications. Q And for heavy-duty applications, what are we talking about? A Construction, like your diesel, there were some diesel but not a lot. q For diesel, we already mentioned Cummins would be one? A Yeah. When I think of diesel, * 'u * -,--i aVs or> "thcit would would be like Class 8 m vehicula , it liks your Cummins, q A your Mack. caterpillar? Yeah, but Cat was more construction. q How about Detroit Diesel? A That would be Class A Allison engines FITCH REPORTING, INC (800) 569-7888 T O M aff-toeM 321 -aOE?-848dd2de1 Off " , P age 75 A That's correct. 1 Q And'you became the sales operation manager of Victor Reinz Division? ' ^ A At the time, it was actually Victor Products Division. q A q Okay. Yes, sir. And what type of products did Victor, the Victor Products Division, sell at that point in time as of May 23rd, 1988-, when you started working there. G3.skts q And were you selling any . asbestos-containing gaskets? A Wo Q And you are awarethatVictor claims that it stopped producing asbestos-containing^askefesj^ June of 1988? ' tv ~ Q June of 1988. SO would you have been selling_ aahestos-containi-ng gaskets between May ........ . ....................... ............................. 1988? A Probably not Q statement? A -t.c +--u a4Let me requalify that. Yes, we could FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 f33WaMea<W321-a057-848dd2d10H Page 76 have acid asbestos-containing gasket3_ d u r l n g ^ h a t _ p ^ th e gasket in June of 1988 .^ ........ o'- ..... ~T)kay. And you are aware that Victor^ s h i n n e d to sell those gaskets until 1990, correct? ^ jjiih ijii iii iii im iim i m il m m m m i i m n 1 1 n u w iiiir^ M iin r * " " . . i < ______.. * i- . A Some of those gaskets that contained __ ------mmuHlMHinHMIHIWUMlWWWIJIlInrarnimrtgMf--*TM asbestos were sold up into the early l_990_s, yes, sir ^ ------ --- q .. can you tell me why Victor continued to sell asbestos-containing gaskets after they ceased the manufacture of them in 1988? A Customers" request. Q Was it also to clear the inventory? A No, because if a customer didn't want asbestos any longer, whether we had inventory or not he would not have received asbestos gaskets. q I guess my question is, the asbestos gaskets, if you went to non, all non asbestos-containing gaskets in '88, why didn't you just get rid of all asbestos-containing gaskets? MR. DORAN: Objection. A It, gets complicated. A transition like that becomes as much of a burden on the oust it does on the manufacturer with depleting inventories as well as all the paperwork attached to making an engineering change to a product. FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 f33b8af-3ee5-4321-a057-848d(i2de10ff Page 78 Q okay. So if they were being produced on contract for the customer, would -Victor still be producing asbestos-containing gaskets after June of 1988? A Wo, sir. Q wow, if Victor did riot sell those_ asbestos-containing gaskets that were on hand afterjune of 1988, they would have lost money, wouldn t they. MR. DORAW: Objection. A If they had not Q Yes, ma'am. A Yes. ^ ^ M I S M A S : We have been going another hour. Do you want to go to lunch? MR. DORAN: The preference is to push through, and she is on vacation and have flights. (Discussion held off the record.) (Recess had.) BY MR. MISMAS: Q And you came back to Lisle after we were talking there -- X am going to ask you anothe- cruestion real guiuk. * Are you familiar with a company called Genuine Parts Company? A Yes, sir . Q And how are you familiar with Genuine FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 fS3bBafi-8ee6^ 321-a057-848ddZcie10ff P age 86 1 is, IS located ^ ^ ^ the repository in 2 3 TOled0' hl' M R . MISMAS: And I will Perry to 4 , ,,ii-h a copy of that list, 5 provide me with P formal P MR. DORAN; You mate a formal 6 n address your formal request, 7 request, and we will addres. y MR. MISMAS; Okay. 8 9 BY MR. MISMAS: ,Q Victor/Dana And do you know when Victor/ first got into the business of selling - i s b e s t os-containing products? , . aSb In 1909 Victor Manufacturing a gasket company MR. MISMAS: Let's go off the record for. two seconds A Q . A you ashed about (Pause.) May I correct my last statement? Sure. i believe I answered it incorrect y . mhat would have been 1967. Victor/Dana. T h a t Q How about Dana A nana never - Dan^ H ^ .. and that was the people corporation, products. divisions that SOIU__ F IT H R E P O R T IN G , IN C (800) 569-7888 mhftaff-8ee6-4321-a057-848dd2de10ff P a g e 87 1 Q Okay. If that makes sense. 2 A v I don^w ant 3 Q ^ 4 to get into a d i s c u s s i o ^ ^ o r p o ^ ^ vou, but do you understand a d i v i s i o ^ p a r t ^ ^ 5 6 corporation? . 7 ^ Yes. Q " T i r is your testimony it was not 8 until 1967 that Dana Corporation started selling S asbestos-containing products? 10 11 A Gaskets. Gaskets. Okay. ' 12 Q You don't know whether or not Dana 13 14 lb 16 17 18 19 20 21' 22 23 24 25 . . . . . .o . . . . . . . . . **" gaskets in 1967, A correct? Correct. M R . DORAN : Ohj ection a - iu o ' the last question. Q A r e -you familiar witthh a product Dana called Spray Craft? . MR. DORAN: Objection from A No, sir. And do you Q corporate headquarters i o . know where FITCH REPORTING, INC (800) 569-7888 f33bf>aff-8ee6-4321-a057-8486d2de10ff Toledo, Ohio. 1 A And you are aware that Q A Which Dana? Dana corporation. Q There is no Dana Corporation any A more. Q A v; Q Dana Companies, LJX? Perrysburg, Ohio, and are you aware that n.na Corporation1s to 0 ^ 1928? "~ _ 0 , . Around that time. ,*w " ,IOTm*,M,TM ,BiraranB7TiarpnTesentativ'e of As the corporate u ' *--- T " * v.^ * dntv to follow nana, do you believe that Dan_ ---------- _ ,, ,7 18 - * This is going to be Exhibit 2 . MR. MISMAS: We will mark this as 2 '* " t i l l -- < " Exhibits i and 2 were marked for identification.) (Pause.) A Okay. Ready, Ms. Duncan? Q fitch reporting, i n c . (800) 569-7888 f33b8aff-8ee6-432't-a057-848dd2de1t)ff P ag e 89 A Yes f si- g okay, can you turn that first page 2 over? That's just a document authenticating the 3 4 dOCUI"ent' 5 Do you see the first page, it says_ 6 7 8 9 40 A q YeSf Si r '. mmmsssSmssm^ B^ . rn fhe page, an<^ Now, can you turn m e t- y ' u it- rgavs regulation 247 . you see ahout halfway down where r. Y - A Yes, sir. Regulation 247, "harmful exposure"? Q A Yes. I'm sorry. Q Okay. 23 A Yes, X see io. "No employer shall use or permit to 24 Q be used in the conduct of his business, " ^ c t ^ FITCH REPORTING, INC. ranm 569-7888 p a g e 90 ! nlace of employant any procees, a- nr other place effect on k establishmen , knovm to have an advers I material/ or condr i lslons have been made to I health unless teg o fche employees and o prevent injury to the . | Klir public* of dusts, fumes, S r e n t r a t i o n s o-1- fe tt^Vya c O B C c i ^ 4' 1 m , V: gases and the air breathed by emp l -- V r r c 'eed r I shall not excee fol-- , concentrations for an eight -- allo-1^ our daily exposure. ^DO y^ on I see that? Yes, sir. j i-hat correctly- Did i react that Yes, sir- says 13 j f we turn^ tthnee pfag=i ^ * 14 QQ t . - a** elght tenths IS mmiinneerraall dduu-ssttss, all the way |16 the way down. A 1 17 18 Q 1 see U ' - -nd it says mineral dusts, and ___ , It savs ntrnerci _ Z ^ *,***e^^ of the materials that ^ H T i s l s o n e ^ f _ t b ---- _ ------- | elation as regulating, cor _ _ this regulatr _ ..........- -- 7- - 0bjeCti0n' vhat Dana had And you told arlier ___ _-- ' ^ ' r p O R T W G , INC. (800) 569 -^8 8 8 1 Page 91 the laws and regulations o f the . duty to be aware of _the_ia_--- -------------- ---- State of 0H' correCl l - ' _ 0 s o Dana this 1946 regulation?^ ion to the form of calls for a legal conclusion. You can g o ahead and answer. I would think, yes. n " ' would have known _in ",ld have Wnown in 1946 tha^rngur-- _ 194 6 that_- Dan? _ ^ ---- - , PmDio^ s and to th^ h r to the S^r^^nEElS ftrm of th e qU eStl0D ' ^ In - -- m a te d c o n d i t i o ^ J : T.o.ss 1that -one. ~ -Xrhhaave one itiore , (4- have to look at it. question. You do duty to test its Did Dana have a au -y ,, nducts which it was selling m asbestos^containing pr ' dauarters in Ohio to see i u corporate headquai Ohio, while at it., ir,, s,,ts of this lf their use would violate the _____ - FITCH REPORTING, INC. (BOO) 569^7888 r'>ihRAff-Bae6-t32,t-a057-B4Bdd2de1( ----- -- ------ - Page 92 regulation? . to the form of MR. D O R A N : O b j e c t i o n t th6 ^ U o n . predicate, foundation. Caiis tor a ie.ai ^ H conclusion, and it is m e eva There is no eVldenCe " MR. MISMAS: NO speaking objections. n sav "irrelevant." No speaking objections. Y O U f ' ou can saY melevant, but no speaking Thatrs fme. lu can i objections. . the form of HR. DORAN: Objection to the i *" ~ t "" r; : , u, a , -- *" " 1 ihpv were within regulations. t0 SUrQe Okay. But that's not niy question, (Question read.) M R . DORAN: Objection to the for, of the question. A Q rails for a legal conclusion, Call 1 don't know. ' That's a faimr aarniesWwferi. You don't know. n n n , a com pany h a 8 j2 0 w X g d g g ^ L 2 S . . a hazard such as the hazard created by_ dangers of a any to pass f i t c h REPORTING, INC, nf a hazard such as asbestos, do you expect the H^nP.rs of a hazard --- -- end users of its --- ----" on its knowledge to the enu _______ ___ . I company to pass on 3 products? 4 ^ tlie form of MR. DORM-- Obiectron to the io 5 the question. ^ 6 t a hazard, If their products c ^ | _ 1 yes. *-- 8 Thank you. Do you have Mr. -Sylvas^'s answers, 9 Dana's answers to interrogatories in front of you* 10 n A Yes. MR. MISMAS: And that will be 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ExhUDit 3 ' (Plaintiffs' Doran Deposition Exhibit 3 was marked for identification.) I take for granted you have seen Q these before? A Q for responses for , j to propounded to which is case Yes, sir. And these a-re Dana Companies, LDC'-s first master set of interrogatories f ^ _ k Sylvasy case, axi defendants in th a Common Pleas, o. CV695277 xn the Court o Cuyahoga County, Ohio, correct? A Yes, sir f i t c h r e p o r t i n g , INC. (800) 569-1888 (33b8aff-BeeM321-a0S7.B4Bdd2de10R ------------- --------------------------~ Page 104 ' . nraohite. The Nitroseal was a kind of a 1 highlight the g P , , material, but 'supermarketing tool, that graphite gaske. m as a general rule, no. __ t 0 So none of the Victor .gaskets 11 ive you an -example. Say we ate seexng an exhaust W1 -f id gasket. It wouldn't say exhaust manxtol manifold gasKer. _ i+ me iust see something. Y - let ] 1 am out buying an exhaust manifold gasket that is going to say Victor on it. It is not going to say Corbestos on 1 7\ ho, sir. Q And they ild not have said asbes o wouldnot na on them, would they? x remember , Not in the later years. 1 , 1 ogOs that did have seeing some packaging back from the 193 .... in H " e p e r i o d Y U ' 3 ~ont hem~ 1 o " S ' anu of the gaskets manufactured or ssoolldd between '6--6 and '88 that y|ou ^- _ 1 ilium.1 II ^ T-vr~\ PITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-1888 R3bBaff-8^&-432l^57-848dd2de1ff Page 106 1 asbestos,- why put them in there? . a Because they were our material 2 3 PaCka9in9'Q But bach to (b) 1.. ^ says 4 "asbestos-containing, jp--r--o--d--u- cts," doesn't it? , 5 ! understand the differentiation you 6 A 7 are making, sir 8 Okay. I am 3ust asking` Q I tio. X understand. 9 A u Because it is kind of hard. I 10 Q rhrouoh all this. This .would wouldn't have had to go through a U 12 have been - okay. Can we go to page of these? 13 14 A Yes. n ' And the question states of the 15 ----- the year the Dete" ant was- 16 interrogatories plea____ _______ ui 17 ffiirrsstt aaddvviisseede oqf. e-i-t-h_e_r__t_h______-_-_-_-- r T T ^_sdbestos and ----!---- T T ^ n o o ntrations of both asbesto---- . 18 ma^ n n m alIowab__---- ",,Conference of Governmental total dust by the A m e n e 19 , ,, .the the A C b m 20 m a U h t i i " -" . a ^ ........... -- t n . --* 21 -n-a-m-e ~o7r~trhre~ewmtpv eyi_7_o--f _f_icial ,that- dld . -- -- And it states in the .ec _ 22 sentence, 23 FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 f33b8aff-8ee6-4321 .a057-348dd2de10ff 1 2 cause 3 4 asbestos MR. DORAN: Objection n Yes. . 0 t T i f I am correct from reading your in 1971 Clarence Hawkins filed the prl0r testimony, rn 197 , ^ asbesto5_related first workers' compensation clar disease against Dana r1 _ A i think it was Hankins, H~a-n-k-i-n-s. FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 mbteff-8wW32i-057-B48W2cte10ff Page Yesr sir A xthat h ap p en ed t0 C la re n c e Do you know what napp Q Hankins? MR. DORAN: Objection - I believe he died. A Do Sou know what he died o n * Q 7 A N' Slr' fter 1971 when Mr. Hankins And even after _ Q t _rSlated Workers' Compensation claim, filed his asbestos Dana/Victor still did not put _rninqs on their gasket material, did they- ^ Objection. Form of the questionA , jai and the gaskets ^ e gasket material A + ViRrmful because of the fartured were not harmful that were manufactured _ _. asbestos fibers fart-urinq containing th , ,, 1 , s. . . . - * "" necessarily require ^ were Q when you say tney not harmful, -fz-ir +-hat statement? . what's the basis f - _ fibers were encapsulated A The asbes product at ^ c They were not loose n . in rubber binders. Tl Y all They were encapsulate -ty 0f Dana's okay. But the majority o Q on oercent asbestos, . ,nina gaskets were 60 perce asbestos-containing 9 FITCH r e p o r t i n g , INC. (800) S69 E33b8aB"B.e'l^2Wa0 Page 111 1 2 3 . . 4 q 5 MR. MISMAS: This is No. 4. (Plaintiffs' Doran Deposition ' Exhibit 4 was marked for identification.) Can you take a look at that for a 6 minute? You have seen this before? 7 A Yes. . q ' so you know where we are 'going. 8 9 A (Witness reading.) It is always interesting for me to 10 11 see the government regulatory agencies keenly interested 12 in seeing asbestos . MR. DORAN: Wait for a question to be 13 14 asked, Marcy. 15 Q 16 Replace Asbestos What I have handed you is "What Will 17 18 correct? 19 A Yes And on the bottom, there is a Bates 20 Q 21 stamp number that says VPD-142-0002632? A 633. Oh, on the front 632. I m 22 23 sorry. I was looking at the other page. q 24 And this document is in the Dana 25 FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) ,569-7888 f33b8aff-8ee6-4321 -aO57-84Sdd?.de10ff P age 112 Correct. p A ---- -- first f l i g h t e d passage on I . And then first n y ;-- --- -- | ---- -- ,, . 7 is a ditisi l chief ! the bottom, x _ -- -- -- --- TT oTTision oF ^ --- -- -- \7lcto^2roducts D j ^ , --- - ^ rieer o x tne ~ ...- ' - nan a C orpora tio n ,'1 sectron, I -Sr>^ " " t says -rte cost ot c o m p a n y - v ^ J ^ Z I - . i _ -------- : Twironmcnt ~ n Mhicl . to using the prodnct. One Pro -------- ^ __ ^ -gser dispu^ HSSEI " tbe .,,.-.I trainees, this l_a ------------ " 1 often the eld user paretsiocuullaarrllyy^se-n-s-t1t,i^g arg . -,m--- -r..a.n.a.u.u.r...to 's.'c"-'r'afpi---an, gasketing. -- ------------------ rtunately, it is the asbestos^ y u canr^ l I I l - ^ -- the end user the produce r 's facility m danger than the personnel ... _ ^ ^ Il| , ,e " s c^uld be particular y - rebuild operations T ttch r e p o r t i n g , i n c . c; Q _ 7 P 8 8 Page 118 O what was the purpose b e h i n d ^ . not tc ^ T ^ r T T t l m o v ^ a Dana asking people not to crease_ ______ -- -- --------- " gaaicet^ A ^ M R . D0RAN: Objection to form. because of the - on a he_ad_block "aMS^ original equipment * * ^puff like that, and because r and uses and sturr rxn ^ fibers. ". q A Asbestos fibers. _ gaskets, ----- you don11 want to creat^du s t ^ --- breathe-` q otoy . so :n the 1960s, h a W V i c t o r K n e w t u u - m 5 -------- ^ ,itl, ............. . ' mrume.l.e.aJs"'"'eTMjcaTsv7boer^stionstofxtbbeer.aimr*t o ____ _ -. -- --- ---- m R.11 DORAN: obgetHon to form. I don't know what Dana knew other nH t for health and safety reasons warnings than the fact that - caused were harmful, the inhalation of -excessi ukM ....., . ,, little mixed up in our questions and our we are getting a litt , knew, .. - what I am asking you, rn the 1 9 ^ ------- _ _ answers - ^ ^ ^ T T T T c ^ a p i n g an a&pesrob ^ _ n^na/Victor knew that fit c h r e po r t in g , in c . (800) 569-1888 1 2 3 4 5 6 A _ . _ the 1980s? Q And they knew that -- -- 7 8 A q ~YZesT*they did not put an asbestos 9 warning on any of its gaskets until the mid '80s, l'O 11 C O rreC t' 12 A 13 MR. DORAN: Objection to form, ' TO the best of my knowledge, it was 14 around '84 85. y And justa. alionogn t-th-ahatt -- n that last 15 Q . . ,, and vou would agree with me - 16 line of questioning an y that Dana/Victor knew that mechanics v e r s i n g wrr 17 brushes in the ' 1 0 s to scrape -- oh, -neve I will ask you, you would agreejn 19 ^ cr who was installiug a 20 the 1970s t t t h i n e d asbestos would f i _________ 21 Victor gasket that contar______ " r,,,cf, corr! ! h , A ' ! k !,, would first have to r e m o v e ^ 1 ^ ,,t--- It may not necessarily Imve been to replace it. It may .. ..... ,___ FITCH REPORTING INC -- ------ - Page 120 an asbestos-containing gasket because they were not all asbestos-containing. _ q And the same thing for ,70s - ' Correct. q what vear did Dana/Virtor_:i ^ _ , year did Dana/Victor start tesjtingJ^ _ p r ^ release of asbes^f2. ^ / v i c t o r did not perform any tests_ That's correct ^ reasonable prudent rhat in the 19'60s knew that asbestos was company that m th. ^ miantities would hazardous to human health m cer a m ^ t 'na or the removal and handling of their - have done testing on don't would a reasonable prudent company m the , vou think hold - I'll start over again. Don't you think a reasonably pruden nn the 1960s would actually have gone m t o the company m tne a " " levels of dust were releasee ill - - . gaSket materials that contained asbestos? Qf MR. DORAN: Objection to t - PITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 f 33bBaff-8ee6-4 3 2 1 a057-84&dd2d e 10f f ------ - ~~ Page 128 , , _ fibers that we used in the production of 1 the raw asbestos fibers m a c 2 our gasket materials. q . SO Johns-Manville was one of the _ 3 .. e fhe -- of raw asbestos to Dana? 4 suppliers of tne .. .-- Yes, sir 5 6 1 8 9 . _n their big bundles, but I 10 warning labels that they put on the <3 ________ _ 11 12 13 14 15 " v e ' known that asbestos could causT d i c e r by those 16 ^m 17 labels? MR. DORAN*. Objection. Form. 18 T saw the labels. 19 20 21 f i t c h REPORTING, INC (800) 569-1888 f33b8aff-8ee&-V32ta057-&48dd2dei0ff Page 129 MR. DORAN: Objection to the for of the question. A If they did, the answer would be yes l Q m TM T TM T n 1 Q68 that said labels on its bags of raw asbes_o-------- ---- ^ ^^inausei^oer, ---- ------- - " .v_i_ in 1968/ wouldn't they? known that --- ^ ^..^.^..r..o.--b D e c t i o n to+-t>,hee foirorm of the question. A ,, V Yes, sir. Who elsTwere the suppliers of raw .Obestos fiber to Dana? A The only other one- that I Know as Lake Asbestos in Ouebeo. ^ ^ Carblde, did they aSbr S? They did not supply raw asbestos. What X remember Carbide - , . a -nroduct by the name of Colidria? ,, p , , , . , P . ^ mm ,, , o. '"" T > ,..... Do you remember a company by the nam f i t c h r e p o r t i n g , IRC. (800) 569-7888 f33t>&aff-&ee6-4321-a057-84&dci2<ie1 Page 136 act m e . I 'm sorry. 1 dldnt Q N o . Go ahead. Imn o. 7, hat was 2 3 the verbiage that as changed? gaskets up a in No. '7 those types o.x g 4 A ,, J noma I 5 until 1988, some of them 6 them did not. 1 Q Okay 8 those are already? 9; A Yes, 10 Q Did 11 were making the changes 12 -A Ho, MR. 13 (Plaintiffs' Doran Deposition - 14 . Exhibit 6 was marked 15 for identification.) 16 t fnr the record, this is 0 And 3 USt for tne 17 i n-j+.^q stcuxvp namber7 ' Tvvhibit 6. There rs a Bates stamp 18 Plaintiff's Exhibit o . v.' u i+- is VPD 188-0002118. 19 think it is vp document before? Have you seen this -docuii 20 Hot to my knowledge. 21 A otay. And this document is from the 22 Q -itorv the Bates stamp from there. document repository, t Uh-huh. _ . 24 . r-p-ad to you, this is a 1 am going to reaa 25 FITCH REPORTING, INC. (800) 569-7888 f33b8aff-8ee6-4321-a057-84-8dd2de10ff Page 137 Dana Corporation intracorcpany communication dated ftpril_ ___ - ri`**'*,,*,*^^MI,^MaiBBBa8aa<agl,llf'hrtlwllllg^^MM.... 25th, 1973, tojj. E. Lane. Do you know who J. E. Lane is: John -- or Jack Lane, yes. ..... aKoiTt~~haif".of what we ship oaskets for service use. About ----- -- is reshaped in our" s o w i n g " to AC SparK t ^ T ^ T S T i r Se r ^ 7 ^ ^ 7 ~ ~ ^ T ^ n d ^ FITCH REPORTING, INC (800) 569-7888 mb8afi-8ee6-4321 -aO57-84Sdd2de1 Off Page 138 ' be plastic bagged, labeled, and d i s p o s e d ^ ! your affidavit. . A 1 don't need to. I was incorrect. X dd not know that they ere mating Asbestoprene oil pan gaskets for Hydramatic. Q So your affidavit is wrong? A That portion of the affidavit is incorrect, yes, sir. _ Q And even though it__saysj^ ^ ^ l . f i t c h r e p o r t i n g , INC (800) 569-7888 f 33b8a ff.8ee6"432'1-a057-848d d 2de 10ff Page 139 1 they wanted cautionary labels in '13, Hydramatic did, 2 Dana didn't put warnings on until the '80s, did they? ^ 3 .........DORAN:............ Objec^orTTotheforiri o f the question Q Asbestos warnings. 6 A The asbestos warnings that I am aware 7 ' of that were put on were in 1984-85 is when they began. B Q And that's 12 years after this. ^BM&B9>MriUHiMTiBlwWWlWiii............................ . 9 MR. DORAN: Objection. 10 A Yes. 11 Q the General Motors safety 32 inspector, there were unacceptable levels of dust an the 13 packaging of where the Asbestoprene gaskets were, wasn't 14 there? 15 MR. DORAN: . Objection to the form of 16 the question-. John, she has never seen the document,, and 17 she has no personal knowledge as to what the General IB Motors inspector found. 19 ' MR. MISMAS: It is your document I 20 don't care 21 MR. DORAN: And so that calls for 22 speculation. 23 MR. MISMAS: She is the corporate 24 rep. I am not asking her about personal knowledge. A 25 corporate representative doesn't talk about corporate FITCH REPORTING,' INC. (800) 569-7888 33b8aff-3ee6-4321 -a057-848dd2de1 Off 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IX 12 17 18 19 20 21 22 23" 26 T 27 28 EXHIBIT "B" tie w iil" "" * " * ^ ^ - h mnTOftiss msURfinoe comf-srm flmRicfln moTOflis;_i____ H9McOr'V"'*-- ^ _ ir, .iTTuUuVmWBu^*CcEe WVEENNUUe *KEWDAH .** cicoo *0 4 jipril JA, ^ '' ' Mr. VI. ?** G^^wntpany V57ic5t0o*' f '^B lovoes letd Kad1 0t06 ?* ^ Bear H* Leeer r-etiort o f several *" f i . ? neoartwent 1^> a^ ,, oria^jie coifcrols. muck fiom S -s i ^ h S S S * - s s s s s s ^ r s S S i s s ^ -- se vJ-ae fc? aaop ^LB protlem. .r t y p ^ a X a su m a s? * ,a t -& '1- 1 - . . Sincerely yoora ' WJ}* golV-9-498 Ene. " ' : : 2 , ..y Mr) % a ere of s s s ^ locations m-u- SMSIi ssss-* -" vepe ^ o s e d t f ^ " o n e ^ * ' 1n ap artm en t 07 * ! * ere5 5 i d W * ^ u e * i/ncpolnocyeeenstrations toelaw the thrcposed to to lu vvwRP^or ,, tg . s - a s r J L . aPloyCeS/-^intDcepoaorctemPetnrtst0io1nS/,,ceexceedeing; the tnreaiw \ asbestos *UB1' limit vain' j fco times, *fp5f oeaded .-- r .g j s s a i - -- - "" g 5 Ct w e s ^ d Uroit VBlUC* oaed to phenol va?r th m ueper-tment 17 * S ^ h o l< l'liiait value' f. S^P^^t^trations belo the fotnialdehyie 8. "^ ^ c ^ o e1nt r a,t lo n s*whel*on ^ `s a s *to^r j1** ,a "" vWor 4 w flherlver operas levei3 \ -S- - 1 0 . At the th ? tX r iv e t x f f f s fa.1?*> * aotive ba*d- u . At s r ^ SiS S m v i a t i c consultant be con- X Xt i s recommended th at a_I*"ra1ienelaticn s with regard to *. t&cted to make sp e c ific r ^ Qn system in Department 14. , AS'aSvS sSSw. r y 'O c t o b e r 15, 1964. i t i | ^ ^ ef t o appropriate medical V- **** S i e f t f ^correspondence S l o b o l vapor inhalation, ^ x" se, and to the DISCUSSION s C "i- 4 fe i f f s e - J W ^ - " - ' t t 7 y ^i U Si h urercorm^meenadredatphaptr iv e d ^ p ^ to r i f^f r ^faby f S ;^fSib owf e r\ >> % *h<S'^wwwsws^. V asbestos du st. R<:"^ r a t o r , ^nd beater room operator at -hhose t i ea when asoesw* . ... 1 rivcrg in Department 14 working _ a, x t i s recommended that emp ? viith personal p ro tectiv e y j ?l or near the Presses $ hearing appliances. 00 * industrial noise from. 1 ,*. i j r r s s " " 5 is s s r ^ 1 v. ~ % r& open flames near the raw ruo > pp th s DtJ.xSi'fi * S ^ V S -F ^ K ^ F "" s s ^ ? j . r w ^ 7n r b ri.sss * l VMG-31*0000327 i T -3,, , ,, __p c p , ) . phenol vapor S * $ ^S Werse effects xss r " " rtave batld3 should 1 E s t i v e , cafe l ^ e l s ^ w be rept^ ly ^ f f c t g a t u e and S f S S g ^ r S S 4 . Sit <"* iTO SAMPLING AKP AHfCUCSIS SW lchlcsrcth fylcn ee vap sor con seentr ^atlana w ^ere^ ^ ^ -f ^ t r"ic h l;o r - ox -*2-s*Sffi SSf S S S sS . a formaldehyde va* ^ collected in rdget rhorae a e b ^ d ^ t 6^ P i l l i t e r f ^ t e r . Air Qf rB--A. BldioTefavee^ d fc^ a l yZer, Model 4 ,,00003^ VbA^1 v muaTf-HM iinawiMi^^tPSSy^T -it- These methods are standard for Industrial Hygiene p r a c tise , -TIT3CBSSX0M chemical analyses oj f -^ar am-pa jOaQncen tsra,tSioings ue1xfcetedring5 th~e indicate d l^ t o n ^ a lc o b ^ a ^ eOoncen^ ordlnarlly p ts th resh o ld llnu-t v aiu . . he*r*,v in d u s t r ia l handling- o n ly a low degree of hazard u tiv c Y a t high co n ce n tr a tio n s, While capable or, diaeetone aloonol to s good properties fir r ita tio n of the system ic in ju r y , even m ild ^ ^ S r t s . 's s a . t s a s a .3 a^nrs M i r - r t S J S ? 1* a' safe lev el for P^aI0^K d^ rep ^ based upon human tchormesfohrotl.d lTiabil^e ^ iinn dd iiccaatteess tth^amt epmipuloyy^ees bwhoerirkin^g w isthtaintiothnes j oven room are exposed to cont e" ^ _ necowmendatlon 1 was made exceeding-the th r^ h old I l ^ t v a w ^ Jf w is m t 'h on -the b a sis o f em pl" ^J , , vatem within s ix months, possible to correct t h e f u n c t i o n testa s; i t may be advisable t0 ? es r t might be added that performed on the vei? r2? hePneedlessly alarmed p articu larly If phyflicfl.1 -ex0wina.tion - " * *?" Employee, in D e p a r t 33 are exposed t o tt-lowthe threah^dritait ^ u e Tabie^ " o f ^ p.P.M. employee at the open oip tana recei h r _day lB below \ the t ^ a b`o ledxplo^surte ^forLme^vyl^'S i t o tKoi aStSi w. oInt the cembenting A S S T `5 S J d x"4* 14 lM " ** -- .1 parts are painted. Tables IX and XIX indicate ^ ^ e n S r ^ o n f b e l l w ^ t f " 09 arc exposed to ^ g ^ g S a t t s that raw rubber in the eon- threshold. Table m ills provides a source of \ ta in e r s by the various sh^ r c^ en tra tlo r> can be minimised fo r t h e ^ n t a i n e r s . A recommendation was made to th is e f f e c t . Y^viO-51 - 0 0 0 0 3 2 9 'J '3 V' < ~5~ ijaeent to the degreaser` l ^ l l S S T c S S t S contact 1th the f l e g r e - . vapor base,. * w ~ *,,ssi'S" . ^ g?`.."ssssi1s f r 4 % S r ^ s t s ^ o S " sr^fsssrs. s isbea tests. " " c E^P'-cyaas ^ JS^S^^aoTthTtl^S^A SiSfB&STSS'V 5 te g l i d e d * J S W fo r m a ld e h y d e resistant gloves. Graphs 1 and 2 Indicate t h - r l ^ * j ^ j S S S S S l S 8^ " Bt times are tS a eex p o su res are not th e ten ta tiv e safe la v e U . As t b e | | ^ the eontrol 0f continuous, no recommendation la waa^ g ij.aica.te continuous iB duetrlal n oises Gr^P^s 3i * These employees should he industrial hearing lo sses. i ant to thank you for the-cooperation and assistan ce t received w S le making th is study. Respectfully submitted - L) .<+>. ti i William H. Krebs Industrial Hygienist 004-493 4- 14-64 | KtWB#WM***fWECR*r mutual tnsu**<x outturn* ' due*TM "> _J " to* m k -'lii A p ril K 1966 .' f d t o r ^ S l c t u S S ^ S k e t Company Dear Mr* Leedert a s t t g a t e a a t t h a t tim e = *" 8 8 W sto a <'p**` ' UO S d l r a ^ a r sh e e tin g 111= S iT S f i^ =** sa a " - :r -- - S I ! ! e a i t ! t e to o o n ta e t ma. Yours very truly G. j . K r a fc ls ia g r i S ^ e c t e S ^ - Section 788-7-466 Bnc* VlviG-42-0001134 V M G 42-0001134 m E2P0ET OP BBJUSiml KTOIHE 3MDY 17 :his report c o v e r-s t+khe* T>agtiits result of a study Tuade in InVBStigafced during ?P.nQMHEHBft!HOKa ` . rriil 2707 be more couple ^exy That the shei^a fi5ts a S b o t t o to provide - . enclosed on the l ept vapors by the vanilla- -* SSSS* 2 *-- / That th. P S ? b tS ,j S ; S l w u g operation and the beater ^ ited states Bureau "o f i k S t S & S o n i o a i , producing * ;' respirators on the job. nwMMGf OF RSSUlgB s r r t s i s 'd S S t^ 5 1 The o p e ra to r >* ^ l^ r f tb ^ tS c e 'tM ^ S e s M id f g & s r s t s s W J ? ^ r lLr' S fE u.1* I s r B s i s s ^ g j f S C 1 5 solveht drip ; fro. ^ V X | 0 t t o r a b r r a t U - o S tchaep tnuirle ldia t a l l , tthheeyy ppass througmh tbd r a f t i n tt nhe area VMG-42-0001135 YMG-42-000113-1 - 2- ' will also prevent the vapors from being captured. For these reasons, the sheeting still should be enclosed as much as possible, leaving open only those places where direct access to the machine Is necessary for operation. This would sean completely enclosing the bottom of the machine, the front of the machine up -to the top of the front roller, the sides of the machine, and the back as high as possible. This should make it possible to control the solvent vapor exposure without increasing the exhaust flow rate, although that may be necessary also. It was noted that the covers used for the containers of raw. rubber at the sheeting mills were not always used. Stricter employee supervision is necessary in. -this case. Although-no samples were taken there, the other .large sheeting mill in the same- room as #2707 probably presents a similar problem. The operators- of the bagging operation and the beater operation were wearing respirators during this study. However, these respirators were not United States Bureau of Hines approved type. The ones being used were intended for use with non-toxic nuisance dusts only. Asbestos dust does'not fall in this category. Should you have any questions about this report or if we cfm help you in any way, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted G, ,JL. Krafcisin . . Industrial Hygienist Special Technical Services Section 788*466 VMG-42-OOOU3S VMG-42-0001136 SOXSB8T VAPOH CONCENTRATIONS MARCH 18, 1966 Location Of Sample KC66l43-Breathing zoom of operator of sheeting mill. #1911 KC66l44-Breathing zone of operator of sheeting mill #2707 Kc66lU5-Breathng one operator of sheeting mill #2707 MEK m 43 10 . 11 .21 9 28 TOLUOL 72 . 455 475 DA Trace 1 i MEK - Methyl Ethyl Ketone IPA - Isopropyl Alcohol V. UA - Diacetone Alcohol Toluol (Toluene) if 200 parts per Threshold limit value for million. All measurements are given in parts per Million. 788-466 VMG-42-0001137 V M G -4 2 -0 0 0 1 137 ASBESTOS DUST CONCENTMTiOKS MARCH l8j 1966 Location of sample Bxposure-MFPCP Kc66l^6Breathing tone of fiberizer operator KC661^7-Breathing zone of bagger operator KCSSl^-Breathlng zone of beater operator . KC66l49-Breathing zone of beater operator, during complete cycle- Threshold limit value for asbestos dust is 5MPPCP. MPPC? - Millions of Particles Per Cubic Foot, VMG-42-OOOl 138 VMG-42-0001138 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 EXHIBIT "C" 23 24 25 26 27 1 E dw ard R. H ugo [Bar No. 124839] . R andall K. B ernard [Bar No, 1815221 2 BRYDON HUGO & PARKER 135 M ain Street, 20thFloor ' 3 San Francisco, CA 94105 . Telephone: (415) 808-0300 4 Facsimile; (415) 808-0333 5 Attorneys for Defendant DANA COMPANIES, LLC 6 (fo rm tty Imown as DANA CORPORATION) RECEIVED DEC 2 42009 7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 - i n AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 9 LO 11 IN R E :. ' 12 COMPLEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION, 13 Plaintiffs, 14 15 (ASBESTOS) ' Case No. 828684 DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND STANDARD INTERROGA u FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 16 17 18 19 . 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PROPOUNDING PARTY: PLAINTIFFS RESPONDING PARTY: DANA COMPANIES, LLC SET NUMBER: ONE ' rnm iM tN A E Y STATEMENT These interrogatories seek inform ation about events th at occurred m any years ago. These responses are based upon a reasonable investigation into the relevant tacts and inform ation currently known- to Dana Companies. D efendant responds to these interrogatories at this time w ith respect to its former Spicer Clutch Division.1 This Preliminary Statement applies to and is incorporated into ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ S f o m p a n i e s responds to these interrogatories after reasonable 27 28 Brydon [u3o5oM&AVPSTaRrEEkTer Zti1*FLOOR inFFnviso,CA94105 that produced dutches for automotive vehicles. --- jp"TmtpF f TT'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES"AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAIN1HPI S STA^TMPD BVTCRROGATORIES TO PWCTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 1 investigation w ith the best available inform ation presently know n to it about (tie Spicer 2 Clutch Division and its historical product lines. In some cases, Defendant is not aware of 3 any individuals w ith personal knowledge of relevant information covering early years of 4 th e Spicer Clutch Division. Moreover, the docum ents available do n o t provide all of tire 5 inform ation so u g h t Accordingly, D efendant will respond only to the extent that there is 6 inform ation currently available and reviewed that it believes is sufficient to respond to, in 7 whole or in part, the interrogatory, 8 Defendant reserves the right to amend, supplement, modify or otherwise change 9 these responses in the event that it acquires additional information responsive to these 10 interrogatories, or if it appears that inadvertent or administrative omissions or errors 12U have been made. Unless otherwise requested in the interrogatory, these responses are -,lim ited to U.S.A, m anufacturing and sales. 13 To the extent that these responses refer to documents that m ay contain 14 inform ation responsive to an interrogatory, those documents w ill be made available for 15 review up o n request, at a m utually agreeable time, in Toledo, Ohio. An index is 16 available for the documents in Defendant's docum ent repository. 17 GENERAL DETECTIONS 18 Because General O rder No. 129 restricts the objections that m ay be interposed to 1.9 these standard interrogatories, this D efendant asserts the following general objections 20 w hich are perm itted by General Order 129. 21 D efendant objects to each interrogatory and part thereof to the extentthey call for 22 inform ation protected by (a) the attorney-client privilege, (b) attorney-w ork-product 23 doctrine, (c) any applicable privilege relating to communications betw een counsel for 24 D efendant and counsel for other defendants regarding this or similar litigation, (d) any 25 applicable privilege relating to communications between Defendant's employees or 26 counsel and Defendant's insurers regarding the defense of this claim or claims of this 27 28 2 D A NA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS CT.A W T C F P or*ATrtPTRQ rn PPTrTTOM TYEERMn AMTV RTTRETTAM T TO (TEMRRAT.ORDER 19Q 1 type, (e) any privilege relating to confidential trade secrets or confidential 2 coxrmiuracations, (f) the right of privacy, or (g) any other privilege. 3 INTERROGATORIES 4 INTERROGATORY NO. 1: ' 5 IDENTIFY the person verifying these answers on YOUR behalf. 6 RESPONSE: 7 M uch of the information sought by these interrogatories has been accumulated 8 over time and not necessarily for the purpose of responding to these interrogatories. It is 9. n o t possible to now identify each person who, at some time, m ay have provided 10 inform ation th at is now being used to respond to these interrogatories. No single U employee, officer, or agent of the company has direct know ledge of the documents and 12 inform ation necessary to supply each and every response, Thomas Dickson, former 13 engineer w ith the Spicer Clutch Division of the form er D ana Corporation, has verified the 14 responses to these interrogatories in order to comply w ith veri fication requirements 15 u n d er state law, Mr. Dickson can be contacted c/o Janis Foley, Cooper & Walinsld, LPA, 16 90.0 A dam s Street, Toledo, Ohio 43604. 17 INTERROGATORY NQJ2: . 18. State the date of first em ploym ent w ith YOU, and the dates and titles of each jab 19 position the person verifying these interrogatories has held while employed by YOU. 20 RESPONSE: . 21 See Response to Interrogatory No. 1, w hich is incorporated herein as if fully- 22 rew ritten. Thomas Dickson w as em ployed b y D efendant from 1964 to 2000, arid held a 23 n u m b er of positions in engineering, sales, and marketing. From 1964 to 1966 he was in a 24 training program at the Transmission Division in Toledo, Ohio. From 1966 to 1971 he 25 w as a salesm an in the Service Parts Division in Toledo, Ohio, From 1971 to 1976, he was 26 a Regional M anager of the Spicer Clutch Division in Allentown, Pennsylvania. From 27 1977 to 1981, he w as the Clutch Plant Foreman in Auburn, Indiana. From 1981 to 1986, 28 Brydon Hugo & P arker UiMAINSTRPET SanFianclicFoU,XCKAl 5M)0S he w as the Chief Engineer of the Clutch Division in Auburn, Indiana. From 1986 to 1993, 3 DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S Q T iN T ven TWTPRRCIOATORTRS to friction d efen d a n ts pu r su a n t TO GENERAL ORDER 129 1 B. W hether participation in any such program w as a -mandatory condition of 2 employment or was voluntary; 3 C. W hether THIS DEFENDANT has DOCUMENTS of such program(s); 4 D. The IDENTITY of the custodian of such DOCUMENTS. 5 RESPONSE: . 6 Defendant, Dana Companies, LLC (formerly Dana Corporation) had employees, 7 including plant nurses, as well as consultants who administered physical examinations 8 for some employees. Asbestos-related medical examinations were not provided to 9 employees at the Spicer Clutch Division facilities because the employees at the Spicer KT Clutch D ivision facility did not handle or w ork w ith raw asbestos and were not otherwise 11 exposed to asbestos fiber in am ounts exceeding applicable occupational limits. A t no 12 tim e has D efendant made, manufactured, or sold end products th a t could cause intensely high exposures, 'dMTERRQGATORY NO. 25: . P rior to 1973/ d id any person file a W orkers' Com pensation claim for asbestos- related injuryagainst THIS DEFENDANT or against any W orkers' Compensation insurance, carrier w hich provided coverage for THIS DEFENDANT? If so, state the rotal num ber of such claims, and for the first 20 such claims state: A. The date of such claim; B. The nam e of the claimant; C. The case number; D. .The court in which the claim was field; E. The IDENTITY of THIS DEFENDANTS custodian of DOCUMENTS evidencing such claims. RESPONSE: ' As to the Spicer Clutch Division, D efendant is not aware of any w orker's com pensation claims, D efendant's first record of a w orkers compensation claim for an Brydon Hugo & Parker 155aMoA^INa*oSoTRREET SanFrancisco.CA94)0S alleged asbestos-related disease w as filed in 1971, by Clarence Hankins, at Victor ' 17 DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS . STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 1 Yoducts Division's Chicago plant. Defendant does not know if the claimant did indeed contract an asbestos-related disease, or if so, if it w as caused by exposure to asbestos 3 luring the course of bis employment with Defendant. Additional information 4 esponsive to this request may be derived from documents located in Defendant's 5 document repository in Toledo, Ohio, Defendant's documents will be made available 6 :or inspection and copying at a m utually convenient time, The b u rd en of compiling' 7 responsive information from these documents would be substantially the same for the 8 Plaintiffs as it w ould be for D efendant C.CP. 2030.230, 9 INTERROGATORY NO. 26: 10 Does THIS DEFENDANT have insurance available to cover judgm ents) entered 11 against it in asbestos-related personal injury lawsuits? If so, state: . . 12 A. The nam e and principal place of business of any insurance carrier w ho has 13 . issued such policy of insurance; H' B. The num ber and effective date of each policy; 15 C. The am o u n ts) of coverage of each policy; 16 D. ' The applicable dates of coverage. 17 lg 15 2( 21 2: 2: 2i 2! 2! 2' 2: >N RESPONSE: . Defendant objects to this interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome because Plaintiffs have not identified a particular product or dates and extent of exposure to that product. D efendant further objects to responding to this interrogatory and relies upon the privilege between an insurer and insured in discussions regarding the defense of any claim or category of claims. Subject to. and w ithout waiving objections, available docum ents responsive to this request will be m ade available for review upon execution of a confidentiality agreement. INTERROGATORY NO. 27: . State whether YOU have controlled, purchased, or in any way acquired any controlling interest in any corporation or business entity which has rained, m anufactured; produced, processed, compounded, sold, supplied, distributed and/or 18 DANA COMPANIES, LLCS SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 1 otherwise placed RAW,ASBESTOS or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS in the 2 stream of commerce. If so, state: 3 A. The nam e and address of said corporation or business entity; 4 B. The dates YOU controlled, purchased or acquired any interest; and 5 C. The nature of the business as it pertains to asbestos. 6 RESPONSE: D efendant began business operations in 1904. It was incorporated in 1916 under 8 the nam e Spicer M anufacturing Corporation. In 1946, the corporation changed its name 9 to D ana Corporation, hr 2008, u nder a bankruptcy plan of reorganization, Dana 10 C orporation was m erged into Dana Companies, LLC, 11 D efendant objects to the characterization of any of the businesses described as 12 predecessors to Defendant. In 1919, D efendant (incorporated as Spicer Corporation in 13 1916) acquired Salisbury Axle Company. In 1954, Salisbury Axle w as liquidated. 14 D efendant subsequently formed Spicer Axle Division, Mobile Off-Highway Division, and 15 Spicer Heavy Axle Division, which m anufactured com pleted axle assemblies. At 16 custom er request, some completed axles incorporated finished brake assemblies that 17 contained linings m ade w ith asbestos and other ingredients. Sales of such products 18 ended sometime in the 1990s, although the exact date is unknow n to D efendant atth is IS time. 2C In 1929, D efendant acquired all outstanding capital stock of Brown-Lipe Gear 21 C om pany of Syracuse, New York. 25 In 1947, D efendant acquired A uburn Clutch Co,, which later became Spicer Clutch Division, Spicer Clutch Division manufactured clutches, prim arily for heavy duty trucks, th a t incorporated clutch facings that may have contained asbestos until 1983. Defendant did not manufacture the clutch facings. Non-asbestos clutch facings were available no later than 1981, Defendant sold the Spicer Clutch Division in 1998. In 1973, Defendant acquired the stock of Formsprag. It m erged with Defendant in 1975, and Form sprag Division w as formed. Form sprag Division manufactured industrial 19 DANA COW ANIES.LLC'SSUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAMTIFFS STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 1Z9 1 clutches and flexible couplings. Some of the dutches were assembled with facings that 2 contained asbestos. The facings w ere n o t m anufactured by Defendant. In the 1970s, 3 Form sprag became p art of Defendant's Industrial Power Transmission Division. In 1991, 4 Form sprag became p art of W arner Electric Division, Defendant sold the flexible 5 couplings p a rt of the business in 1993. D efendant sold die industrial dutch business in 6 2000. . 7 W ichita Clutch Company became a division of Defendant in 1981 as the result of a 8 dissolution of Wilson-Wichita, a former subsidiary. Wichita Clutch manufactured 9 clutches and brakes for industrial and marine uses. Some clutches and brakes contained- 10 friction m aterials th at contained asbestos. The friction materials w ere n o t m anufactured 11 by Wichita Clutch. By early 1987, Wichita Clutch had ceased m anufacturing products 12 w ith com ponents that contained asbestos. In 1991,'Wichita Clutch became p a rt of the 13 W arner Electric Division of Defendant, Wichita Clutch w as operated as p a rt of the 14 W arner division until the year 2000 w hen assets, including related facilities, subsidiary 15 operations, and product lines of Wichita Clutch, w ere sold. 16 In 1-985, Defendant acquired the stock of W arner Electric Brake & Clutch Company, 17 w hich m erged into Defendant in December 1986. W arner Electric Division m anufactured 18 electric clutches, electric bralces, electric w heel brakes, and other products. Some-Wsrner 19 Electric products were assembled with facings th a t contained asbestos, which were 20 assem bled into clutch rotors and brake m agnets, in wheel brake linings and actuating 21 magnets.. W arner Electric Brake & Clutch Com pany began a program in 1983 to phase 22 ou t the use of components that contained asbestos. By the Spring of 1986, W arner 23 Electric ceased manufacturing electric clutches, brakes, and clutch/brakes w ith friction 24 m aterial that contained asbestos as a component. In 2000, the assets of W arner Electric 25 w ere sold, 26 INTERROGATORY NO. 28: 27 If THIS DEFENDANT entered into any agreements for the rebranding of any 28 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING FRICTION PRODUCTS by THIS DEFENDANT for resale or 20 DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S STAT-JDART) TNTKRROCATORTP.S to friction d efen d a n ts pu rsu a n t to GENERAL ORDER 129 1 F. OZ RESPONSE: If said documents or copies still exist, where they are located 3 Defendant's document repository contains m any documents, including numerous 4 catalogs, brochures, and sales literature for the years 1965 to 1989, th at provide 5 information, pictures, and diagrams concerning the m anufacturing and sale of thousands 6 of Spicer Clutch Division's products. Defendantss documents will be made available for 7 inspection and copying at a mutually convenient time. The burden of compiling 8 responsive inform ation from these docum ents would be substantially the same for 9 Plaintiffs as it w ould be-for Defendant. C.C.P. 2030.230. 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 33: ' 11 W hen do YOU contend THIS DEPENDANT first became aware that there is an 12 association betw een asbestos exposure and disease in hum an beings? 13 RESPONSE: 14 A lthough it is n o t possible to respond to this interrogatory w ith any degree of 15 certainty, D efendant understands that as early as the 1930s there was medical literature 16 reporting on individual cases and textile m anufacturer plant experience. These reports 17 involved asbestos textile m anufacturing plant employees whose w ork environments 18 w ere largely uncontrolled and could have exceeded hundreds or asbestos fibers per cc. 19 The disease associated w ith these intensely h ig h exposures was asbestosis. At no time 20 h as D efendant made, manufactured, or sold end products that could cause such intensely 21 h ig h exposures, nor does Defendant believe that such exposures occurred at its 22 m anufacturing facilities. At all relevant times the available data has show n that clutches 23 m ade w ith asbestos-containing clutch facings are n o t hazardous to w orkers' health. 24 It is not possible to pick a specific time or date w hen it was known that certain 25 distinct diseases were causally related to exposures to certain types and/or levels of 26 exposure, D efendant understands that pleural plaques and thickening, asbestosis, lung cancer in association with asbestosis, and mesothelioma were all causally associated w ith 28 Hugo & Parker 135Maimstreet San prsn&feco. CAMios exposure to certain types of asbestos fiber and levels of exposure as of the 1960s. 25 DAMA COMPANIES, LLCS SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 I Defendant does deny that all fiber types cause mesothelioma and that asbestos exposure . 2 causes cancer other than as listed above. Defendant also denies that any asbestos-related 3 disease occurs as a result of exposure to gaskets and gasket m aterials of the type 4 manufactured and/or sold by Defendant. Defendant also denies that any asbestos-related 5 disease occurs as a result of exposure to asbestos-containing products manufactured 6 and/or sold by the Spicer Clutch Division. . 7 INTERROGATORY NO. 34: . 8 H ow do YOU contend THIS DEFEND ANT first became aw are th a t there is an 9 association between asbestos exposure and disease in hum an beings? 10 RESPONSE: 11 See Response to Interrogatory No. 33, w hich is incorporated herein as if fully 12 rewritten, 13 ' INTERROGATORY NO. 35: 14 Either attach all DOCUMENTS or disks containing such data, evidencing the 15 inform ation u p o n which YOUR contentions in Interrogatory Nos. 34 and 35 are based or 16 describe such DOCUMENTS w ith sufficient particularity that they m ay be m ade the 17 subject of a request for production of documents, 18 RESPONSE: 19 See Response to Interrogatory; No. 33, w hich is incorporated herein as.if fully 20. rew ritten. Information responsive to this request m ay be derived from Defendant's 21 docum ents located at D efendant's docum ent repository in Toledo, Ohio. Defendant's 22 docum ents w ill be m ade available for inspection and copying at a m utually convenient 23 time. The b urden of compiling responsive inform ation from these docum ents w ould be 24 substantially the same for Plaintiffs as it w ould be for Defendant. C.C.P. 2030.230, 25 INTERROGATORY NO. 36: . 26 W ie n did YOU first w arn YOUR employees that exposure to asbestos could be. 27 hazardous to hum an health? State: 28 A, W hether the first such w arning was w ritten or oral; BR 26 DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBfECHONS TO PLAINTIFFS STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFEND ANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129  1 Eupplied asbestos-containing friction material that m ay have been used by the Spicer 2 Hutch Division in the manufacture of certain clutch brakes. TMTR'RROGATORY ND-..57: . As to eada ASBESTOS-CONTAINING FRICTION PRODUCT listed in YOUR 4 preceding answers to these interrogatories, did DEFENDANT w arn of the health hazards 5 6 of asbestos? It so, state for each such warning: 7 A. The content, size, color and location; whether- the w arning appeared on the 8 material and/or on the container and/or placed on a tag; whether the 9 w arning was included-in contracts; w hether the w arning was included m . 10 advertising or other promotional material; 11 B. State whether YOU have any photographs thereof; 12 C The inclusive dates on which YOU used each such warning, 13 ' D . State all changes YOU m ade in such w arnings and the dates of such 14 . 15 16 17 18 changes; B IDENTIFY tire person m ost know ledgeable about YOUR-wamings and- warning policy; F. Do YOU have or know of samples, photographs orDOCUMENTS depicting the above warnings? 19 RESPONSE: 20 The U nited States Government w arning regulations did n o t apply to asbestos21 containing dutches. Among other ihings, w ith respect to clutches m ade w ith asbestos 22 containing d u tch facings: 1) The fibers w ere encapsulated in the product; 2} The exposure 23 to the facing in the dutch, if any, w ould have been of such short duration th at there 24 w ould be no opportunity for a m eaningful exposure; 3) The type-of asbestos generally 25 u sed in d u tc h facings does n o t create a significant risk of harm at levels of exposure . .26 associated w ith such facings; 4) Tire exposure to the clutch facing w ould n o t have 27 occurred on a frequent basis; 5). Historical medical and sdentific evidence did not support "Tra risk of harm from exposure to asbestos in clutch facings. Accordingly, to Defendant s Brtoon 1352MaTMAWPiSeT*WmHvT SanFrancisco,CA94105 49 D A N A COMPANIES, LLCS SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECIIWS TO b STAND ARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL uRDER 1 - r Knowledge, the Spicer Clutch Division did not accompany its finished products with 2 M aterial Safety Data Sheets or package labels w arning of the health hazards of asbestos. The clutches sold by the Spicer Clutch Division that were m ade w ith asbestos-containing 4 facings w ere not of a nature or type that, w hen used in an ordinary and foreseeable 5 manner, w ould have presented a significant potential for exposure, As such, the Spicer 6 Clutch Division did not believe that its produ cts made w ith asbestos-containing facings 7 posed any hazards toward end users. S INTERROGATORY NO. 58: . 9 State whether-any surveys or studies of am bient asbestos dust have been 10 conducted by YOU or on YOUR behalf at vehicle repair or m aintenance facilities. If yes, 11 state as-to each such survey or studjc 12 A. The subject matter, title and date of each study; 13 . B. The date and the nam e of the person authorizing the study; 14 C. The reason for the study; . ' 15 D. IDENTIFY-the persons who conducted the study; 16 E. The date the study was completed; * 17 F. W hether the results were published and dissem inated and, if so, where- and 18' to whom; 19 G. The results of the study; 20 H. If statistical analyses were made, state the date and describe the results and 21 assumptions upon which'they were based; 22 I. Either attach all DOCUMENTS or disks containing such data, evidencing 23 the information sought in this interrogatory and its subparts to YOUR 24 answers to these interrogatories or describe such DOCUMENTS with 25 sufficient particularity that they m ay be made the subject of a request for production of documents; . . J. IDENTIFY the person(s) presently m ost knowledgeable about the information sought in h is interrogatory or its subparts. 50 DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S ST AlvTAVn T7MTRR1?0 0 ATOT?TF,S TD KRTCTTOM DKFBMnAWTS PTIPST TANTT TO (VKWF.'RAT. ORHER 1?9 yESffTATfK I, Thomas EHckeon( state that I have read the foregoing responso and objections to Plaintiffs' interrogatories and the Bame are (rue and accurati; to the best of my knowledge and belief, ' M uch of the information sought by those interrogatories has been accumulated over time but not necessarily for purposes of responding to these interrogatories. It is not possible to now identify each person who, at some time, may have provided information that is now being used to answer these, interrogatories. No single employee, officer, or agent of the company has direct knowledge o f the documents and information necessary to supply each and every response. I do not have direct knowledge regarding every specific response, T am informed mat the review of the documents nori-dieussions referred to above support the responses based upon the information available as to the date of my signature. Sworn to Thomas D ickson " " ' , 200# I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 -8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 EXHIBIT "D" 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  E dw ard R. H ugo [Bai- No. 124839] Randall K, Bernard [Bar No. 181522] 2 BRYDON HUGO & PARKER 135 M ain Street, 20th Floor 3 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 808-0300 4 Facsimile: (415) 808-0333 ' STMT" AIM Of R E C E IV E D Rle` DEC 3 fl 2009 5 Attorneys for Defendant DANA COMPANIES, LLC 6 7 L-to MT 2 .| k \ \ 0 CALENDARED M 8 SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY-OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 10 11 RONALD PALMER and CAROL 12 PALMER, V3BESTOS) ase No. 275247 13 Plaintiffs, 14 vs. 15 AC AND S, INC., et al, 16 Defendants, DANA COMPANIES, LLCS RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 W ITH RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT DIVISIONS 17 18 PROPOUNDING PARTY: Plaintiffs RONALD PALMER and SHARON PALMER 19 RESPONDING PARTY: D efendant DANA-COMPANIES, LLC .. 20 SET NUMBER: O N E (l) 21 | PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 22 This preliminary statem ent appHes~to and is incorporated into each response. 23 D efendant responds to these interrogatories after reasonable investigation- w ith the best 24 available inform ation presently know n to it about the Spicer axle product line. In some 25 cases, D efendant is n o t aware of any individuals w ith personal know ledge of relevant 26 inform ation covering early years of axle m anufacturing. M oreover, the documents 27 available to D efendant do not provide all of the inform ation sought. Accordingly, 28 __________________ _________________ _ 1 _______________ _________________________ D A NA COMPANIES, LLCS RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 W ITH RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT DIVISIONS 1 D efendant will respond only to the extent that there is inform ation currently available and 2 review ed that it believes is sufficient to respond, in whole or in part, to the interrogatory. 3 Unless otherwise requested in the interrogator)', these responses are limited to U.S.A. 4 m anufacturing and sales. . 5 The Spicer axle product lines have historically included axles for off-highway . 6 vehicles, heavy vehicles, light vehicles, and trailers. Throughout this document, the term 7 Off-Highway Products" refers collectively to Spicer Off-Highway Products Division, B Spicer Axle O utdoor Power Equipm ent Components Division, and other end ties that had 9 historical responsibility for Defendant's off-highway axle product lines. The term Heavy 10 Axle Products" refers to D efendant's Commercial Vehicle Systems Division to the extent 11 that, historically, it h ad responsibility for heavy axle product lines, as well as other entities 12' th a t historically m anufactured heavy axles, including the form er H eavy Axle Division, The 13 term "Light Axle Products" refers tq D efendant's Torque-Traction Technologies Group, 14 w hich includes D efendant's w holly-ow ned subsidiaries Torque-Traction Technologies, Inc., 15 Torque-Traction M anufacturing Technologies, Inc., and Torque-Traction Integration 16 Technologies, Inc., to the extent that, historically, these entities h a d responsibility for light 17 axle p ro d u ct lines, as well as other entities th a t historically perform ed light axle-related 18 w ork, including tire former Spicer Light Axle Division. The term "Trailer Axle Products . 19 refers to the Spicer Trailer Products Division to the extent that it, historically; m anufactured 20 trailer axle products, as w ell as other entities th a t historically m anufactured trailer axle . 21 products, including C&M Chassis Products, Inc. (formerly know n as C&M Spring Co., 22 Inc.), the K ershaw Axle Division, and the Truck and Trailer Equipm ent Division. Finally, 23 the term "Axle Product Divisions" will be used to refer collectively to Off-Highway 24 Products, H eavy Axle Products, Light Axle Products, and Trailer Axle Products. 25 Som e.axle assemblies m anufactured by the Axle Product Divisions were dressed 26 w ith brake assemblies. In the past, some of the brake assemblies w ere made with friction 27 material made w ith asbestos. D efendant's Axle Product Divisions never m anufactured 28 Brtdok loco &Parker 13$Mathstiuzet unFra2n0c,ivs,FcoW,iCOKA94105 -----DANA COMPANIES, EECS RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 WITH RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT DIVISIONS friction materials; r a t e , such m ateria* were p h a s e d o tte r separately or as 1 components of brake assemblies by the Divisions from various brake assembly and/or 2 friction material suppliers. As a consequence. Defendant has limited information relating 3 friction materials m ade w ith asbestos that w ere components of some of the axles they 4 num ufactured and sold. Any asbestos in such materials was encapsulated or bonded. 5 i n addition, up until no later than the 1980s, Light Axle Products may have p u t 6 asbestos-containing cover gaskets on certain fully dressed axles. Those gaskets were not 7 m anufactured by the lig h t Axle facilities, b u t rather were purchased fmm other supplrers. 8 a result, andbecause of toe many years that have elapsed stoce sudr gaskeis were last 9 used, D e fe n d a n t s incomplete information concerning ^ - g a s k e t s made with asbestos. 10 11 Anyasbestos in such gaskets was encapsulated or bonded, Defendants investigations to respond to these interrogatories are ongoing, and 12 Defendant reserves fire right to amend, supplement, modify or otoerwise change these: 13 responses in the event that it acquires additional responsive mformatron, or rf ,t appears 14 'that inadvertent or administrative omissions or errors have been made. 15 To the extent that these responses refer to documents that may contain irformatron 16 responsive to an interrogatory, toose documents will be made available for review upon 17 request, at a m utual., agreeable rime, in Toledo, Ohio. An index is avertable for the 18 1-9 documents in Defendant's document repository. g e n e m l o b jb c t iq n s 20 Because General Order No. 1 restricts the objections that may be interposed to. 21 rire.se standard interrogatories, tins Defendant asserts rite following general o p t i o n s 22 23 w hich are perm itted b y General O rder 129. Defendant objects to each interrogatory and part thereof to the extent they ca or 1A inform ation protected by (a) the attorney-client privilege, (b, attorney-w ork-product 25 doctrine, (c) any appbcable priviiege relaring to -- 26 ricarions between cotrnse, for D efendant and counsel for other defendants regarding this or similar le g atio n , ( ) any 27 28 SRYDOVi o& "Parker, Maw Street 2D'" FLOOR indie*CA94)05 1 $ome employees. M edical examinations w ere n o t provided to em ployees at the Spicer Axle. livision facilities because, the employees at the Spicer Axle Division facility did not handle 21 3 c)Tw ork w ith raw asbestos and w ere n o t otherw ise exposed to h azardous levels of asbestos ' 4 fiber. At no time has D efendant made, m anufactured, or sold end products that could 5 <:ause intensely hig h exposures. ' 6 INTERROGATORY NO. 25: 7 Prior to 1973, did any person file a W orkers' C om pensation claim for asbestos- 8. related injury against THIS DEFENDANT or against any W orkers' Compensation . 9 ; insurance carrier, which provided coverage for THIS DEFENDANT? If so, state the total 10 num ber of such claims, and for the first 20 such claims state. 11 A. The date of such claim; ' 12. B, The nam e of ]he_claimant; -13 . C. The case number; 14 D. The court in which the claim was field; 15 E , The IDENTITY of THIS DEFENDANT'S custodian of DOCUMENTS , 1 16 evidencing such claims. 17 RESPONSE; 18 ' Ac to em ployees or form er em ployees of the Axle P roduct Divisions, Defendant is no t aware of any such w orker's compensation claims. D efendant's first record of a *1 1 w orker's com pensation claim fot an alleged asbestos-related disease was filed in 1971, by 20 Clarence Hanlons, at Victor Products Division's Chicago plant. D efendant does not know 21 'Tjf the claim ant did indeed contract an asbestos-related disease, or if so, if it w as caused by 23 exposure to asbestos during the course of his em ploym ent w ith Defendant. Additional 24 inform ation responsive to this interrogatory m ay be derived from docum ents located at 25 D efendant's docum ent repository in Toledo, Ohio. D efendant's documents will be m ade 26 available for inspection and copying at a m utually convenient time, Tire burden of 27 c o m p ilin g re s p o n s iv e information from these docum ents w ould be substantially the same 28 Brydon - Hugo & Parker 135MAINSTREET SanFra2u0c'l"scPQLO,OCTAlM105 19 ________ -- i-sama roM PA 'M IFS 11 C'S RESPONSES A ND OBJECT IONS TO PLAIN 1UTS STAlNioARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 W i t RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCI DIVISIONS I >r the Plaintiffs as it w ould be for Defendant. C:C.P. 2030,230. 2 NTERROGATORY NO. 26: 3 Does THIS DEFENDANT have insurance available to cover judgment(s) entered 4 gainst it in asbestos-related personal injury lawsuits? If so, state: 5 A. The nam e and principal .place of business of any insurance carrier w ho has 6 >sued such policy of insurance; 7 B. Tire num ber and effective date of each policy; 8 C. The amount(s) of coverage of each policy; 9 D. Dae applicable dates of coverage. 10 11 Yes. A dditional inform ation responsive to this interrogatory may be derived horn 12 Locuments relating to insurance coverage located at D efendant's docum ent repository in 13 loledo, Ohio. Such docum ents will be m ade available, for inspection and copying at a 14 nutually convenient tim e u p o n execution of a Confidentiality Agreement, except for 15 locum ents protected from discovery based u p o n the privilege between an insurer and 16 nsured in discussions regarding the defense of any claim or category of claims.. The burden 17 3f com piling responsive inform ation from these docum ents w o u ld be substantially the 18 same for the Plaintiffs as it w ould be for Defendant. C.C.P, 2030.230. 19 INTERROGATORY NO. 27: 20 State w hether YOU have controlled, purchased, or in any wav acquired any 21 iontrolling interest in any corporation or business entity w hich has mined, manufactured, 22 produced, processed, com pounded, sold, supplied, distributed and/or otherwise placed "23 RAW ASBESTOS o r ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS in the stream of commerce, If 24 so, state: li A. li B. 21 C. The nam e and address of said corporation or business entity; The dates YOU controlled, purchased or acquired any interest; and The nature of the business as it pertains to asbestos. 21 2 ____ _ vnu INTDEARNROAGCAOTMOPRAIENSIETSO, FLRLICC'STIROENSPDOENFSEENSDAANNDTSOPBUJERCSTUIAONNSTTTOO PGLEANIENRTAIFLFSO'RSDTEARN1D2A9RWDITH RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT DIVISIONS 1 INTERROGATORY NO. 32: 2 IDENTIFY all brochures, pam phlets, catalogs or other advertising relating to 3 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING FRICTION PRODUCTS and/or RAW ASBESTOS which YOU 4 m anufactured, sold, distributed -or supplied from 1930 to 1985. For each such document, 5 state: 6 A. A description of the document; . 7 B. The year it was printed; 8 C. The period of time in which it w as used; 9 D. The purpose of said document; 10 E. W hether the docum ents or copies of said docum ent presently exist; 11 F. Tf said documents or copies still exist, w here they are located 12 RESPONSE: 13 D efendant's docum ent repository contains m any docum ents, including num erous 14 catalogues, brochures, and other sales literature, th at provide inform ation, pictures, and 15 diagrm ns concerning the m anufacturing and sale of products of the Axle P roduct Divisions. 16 Inform ation responsive to this request m ay be derived from such documents, which are 17 located at D efen d an ts docum ent repository in Toledo, Ohio, D efendant's docum ents will 18 be m ade available for inspection and copying at a m utually convenient time. The burden 19 of com piling responsive inform ation from these docum ents w ould be substantially the 20 sam e for Plaintiffs as it w ould be for D efen d an t C.C.P. 2030.230. 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 33: 22 W hen do YOU contend THIS'"DEFENDANT first became aware th at there is an 23 association betw een asbestos exposure and disease in h u m a n beings? 24 RESPONSE: 25 A lthough it is not possible to answer this interrogatory w ith airy degree of certainty, 26 D efendant understands that as early as the 1930s there was medical literature reporting on 27 individual cases and textile m anufacturer plant experience. These reports involved 28 __ _________ ____________________ 24 __________ _ BR DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 WITH >0*; RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT DIVISIONS D C NOT ATTEMPT TO SAND, GRIND, CHISEL, PILE, HAMMER OR 1 ALTER BRAKE UNINGS IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT PROPER 2 PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT, . 3 FOLLOW O.S.IT.A. STANDARDS FOR PROPER PROTECTIVE DEVICES TO 4 BE USED W HEN WORKING W ITH ASBESTOS MATERIALS.' 5 addition, with respect to Off-Highway Products, D e l e f t made availab.e *6 instruction manuals and other information for each off-highway axle. These materials may 7 8 have contained the following or shmlarlanguage: "W A R N IN G . 9 Some vehicle manufacturers m ay require assembly of brake 10 components on D ana axles that offline m aterials containing asbestos fibers. 11 b r ea th in g asbestos d u st m a y be h a z a r d o u s t o your 12 h e a l t h a n d m a y c a u s e s e r io u s r e s p ir a t o r y o r OTHERBODILY 13 14 HARM, Follow O.S,H.A. standards for proper protective'devices to be used 15 16 w hen working with asbestos materials. W ith respect to Heavy Axle Products, by at least the mid-WSOs, the following 17 Unguage was included in heavy axle maintenance manuals, which manuals were 18 19 d istrib u ted to customers of such axles. "CAUTION . 20 Xc n n - m s BRAKE L IN fflC S OTNTATN ASBESTO SjilgEK S 21 , b r ea th in g a sbesto s d u st m a y be h a z a r d o u s to your 22 h e a l t h a n d m a y c a u se serio u s r e sfk a t o r y o r o m e r 23 24 BODILY HARM ' ' 25 Av n r o c r e a t i n g d u s t . DO NOT REMOVE BRAKE DRUM WITHOUT PROPER PROTECTIVE 26 27 eq u ipm e n t ' 28 49 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - rydon )vi&AIKPSTaRrEkETer oTMFnoon iciscu,CAM10 1 DO NOT WORK ON BRAKE LININGS WITHOUT PROPER 2 PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 3 DO NOT REPLACE BRAKE LININGS WITHOUT PROPER PROTECTIVE 4 EQUIPMENT 5 DO NOT ATTEMPT TO SAND, GRIND, CHISEL, FILE, HAMMER OR . 6 ALTER BRAKE LININGS IN ' ANY MANNER WITHOUT PROPER . 7 PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 8 FOLLOW O.S.H.A. STANDARDS FOR PROPER PROTECTIVE DEVICES TO BE 9 USED-WHEN W ORKING'WTffl ASBESTOS MATERIALS/' 10 D efendant's investigation w ith respect to axles sold by Heavy Axle Products 11 continues. The investigation to date has revealed th a t any brakes m ade w ith asbestos that 12 D efendant installed onto heavy axles came w ith a w arning from the brake manufacturer, 13 which w arning stated that the brake contained asbestos 14 With respect to Trailer Axle Products, by at least the mid-1980s, the following 15 langua4ge w as included in D' efendant's-installation and field maintenance m anual for trailer 16 axles, brakes and components, which m anual w as distributed to customers of such 17 products: ' 18 "DANGER! ASBESTOS BRAKE LININGS CONTAIN ASBESTOS FIBERS 19 BREATHING ASBESTOS DUST MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR 20 HEALTH AND MAY CAUSE SERIOUS RESPIRATORY OR OTHER 21 BODILY HARM 22 AVOID CREATING DUST 23 DO NOT REMOVE BRAKE DRUM WITHOUT PROPER PROTECTIVE 24 EQUIPMENT 25 DO NOT WORK ON BRAKE LININGS WITHOUT PROPER 26 PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 27 28 _____________________________________50_____________________ __ ___ _________ DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATOR)ES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 WITH RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT1DIVISIONS 1 DO NOT REPLACE BRAKE LININGS WITHOUT PROPER PROTECTIVE 2 EQUIPMENT 3 DO NOT ATTEMPT TO SAND, GRIND, CHISEL, FILE, HAMMER OR 4 ALTER BRAKE LININGS IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT PROPER 5 PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 6 FOLLOW O.S.H.A, STANDARDS FOR PROPER PROTECTIVE DEVICES 7 TO BE USED WHEN WORKING WITH ASBESTOS MATERIALS," 8 D efendant's investigation with respect to axles sold by Light Axle Products 9 continues. - 10 M aterial Safety Data Sheets and other inform ation relating to certain axle products 11 w ere also m ade available to customers upon request, 12 Additional information responsive to this interrogatory may be derived from 13 docum ents relating to w arnings located at D efendant's docum ent repository in Toledo, 14 Ohio. D efendant's- documents will be m ade available for inspection and copying at a 15 m utually convenient time. The b u rd en of com piling responsive inform ation from these 16 docum ents w ould be substantially the same for Plaintiffs as it w ould be for D efendant 17 C.C.P, 2030.230, 18 INTERROGATORY NO. 58: 19 State w hether any surveys or studies of ambient asbestos du st have been conducted 29' by YOU or on YOUR behalf at vehicle repair or maintenance facilities. If yes, state as to 21 ' each such survey o r study: - 22 A. The subject matter, title and date of each study; 23 B. The d ate and -the nam e of the person authorizing the study; 24 C. The reason for the study; 25 D. IDENTIFY the persons who conducted the study; 26 E. The date the study was completed; 27 28 BrTOOK mugo & P auker 135MAJKSTHECT SfinFra2n0cTMiscFoU,CXA`i10 51_________ ' DANA COMPANIES, U .C 'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO FRICTION DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 129 WITH RESPECT TO THE AXLE PRODUCT DIVISIONS VERIFICATION I, Gregory Fett, am the Chief Materials Engineer, Dana Spicer Axle Division, and am authorized to make this verification on its behalf. I have read the foregoing Dana Companies, LLC's responses and objections to Plaintiffs' interrogatories and know its contents, No single employee, officer, or agent of defendant has direct knowledge of the documents and information necessary to supply each and every response. I verify that the responses are true based on my personal knowledge as well as that based on information assembled by authorized employees of defendant. I am informed that the review of documents by-and-information from authorized employees of defendant support the responses based upon the information available as to the date of my signature, I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of-the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 1 21 EXHIBIT "E" 22 23 28 1 Edw ard R. H ugo [Bar N o 124839] Randall K. Bernard [Bar No. 181522] 2 BRYDON HUGO & PARKER 135 M ain Street, 20th Floor 3 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 808-0300 4 Facsimile: (415) 808-0333 Ma)' 29 20(i9 3:57PM 5 Attorneys for Defendant DANA COMPANIES, LLC 6 (formerly know n as DANA CORPORATION) 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JTIRTSDICTON 10 11 IN RE: 12. COMPLEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION 13 14 (ASBESTOS) Case N o. 828684 DEFENDANT DANA CO W A NI6S, LLCS AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129' 15 16 17 PROPOUNDING PARTY: 18 RESPONDING PARTY: [San Francisco County Superior Court ______ Asbestos General O rder No. 129] PLAINTIFFS DANA COMPANIES, LLC 19 SET NUMBER: ONE 20 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 21 D efendant-D ana Companies, LLC (formerly know n as D ana Corporation) is 22 providing these am ended responses to interrogatories pursuant to San Francisco Superior 23' -24 C ourt General O rder No. 129. T hat O rder provides th at defendants shall respond to the standard interrogatories w ithout any objections except for objections based upon privilege. 25 These interrogatories seek information about events that occurred many yeais ago. 26 27 These responses are based upon a reasonable investigation into the relevant facts and 28 BRYDON H ugo & Parker 735 MaWSwet 20H*rLoor< SanFranttBCO,CA94105 i ,, _ "TT7t d a n k CQMI7A N IE s7L L C S AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTiPPS' STANDARD t o T l l R e n d a n t e p u r s u a n t t o g e n e r a l o r d e r N O . 129 1 Donation, currently know n to D ana Companies/ LLC. These responses supersede all 2 or responses to interrogatories in this jurisdiction. 3 Defendant responds to these interrogatories at this time for the Victor Products 4 n sion of D ana Corporation, excluding Reinz Wisconsin Gasket Co., for th e period 1967 5 date, and Victor M anufacturing & Gasket Com pany for the period D efendant owned its 6 ,ck (1966-67)2 D ana Companies, LLC provides inform ation concerning Victor 7 m ufacturing & Gasket Com pany for the time period before D efendant acquired its stock, 8 sed upon investigation and docum ent reviews, to the extent it is known. A Plaintiffs 9 ovide inform ation of alleged exposure- to specific products of D efendant not 10 com passed by these responses, D efendant will investigate further and m ay supplem ent li ese responses. , 12 D efendant reserves the right to amend, supplement, modify or otherwise changi 13 ese responses in the event that it acquires additional inform ation responsive to these 14 terrogatories, or if it appears that inadvertent or adm iiustrative omissions or errors have 15 ienm ade. , li To the extent that these responses refer to documents that may. contain information 11 sponsive to an interrogatory, those docum ents will be m ade available for review upon li quest, at a m utually agreeable time, in Toledo, Ohio. li CF.NF.RAL OBTBCTIONS 2< Because General O rder No, 129 restricts the objections that may be interposed to 2 rese standard interrogatories, this D efendant asserts the following general objections 2 ifhich are perm itted b y General O rder 129, 2 Defendant objects to each interrogatory and part thereof to the extent they call for 2 nformation protected by (a) the attorney-dient privilege, (b) attom ey-w ork-product1 2 ioctmae, (c) any applicable privilege relating to communications between counsel for 2 Defendant and counsel for other defendants regarding this or similar litigation, (d) any 2 The former Victor Products Division of Dana Corporation, excluding Ketoz Wisconsin Gasket Co., is hereinafter referred to as "Victor Products Division. 2 ' ! KKE ' DEFENDANTDANA COMPANIES, LLC'S AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD ERT INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 1 category o daims* D ocum ents responsive to tihis interrogatory will be m ade available for 2 review upon the execution of a Confidentiality Agreement. 3 INTERROGATORY NO. 27; 4 State whether YOU have controlled, purchased, or in any w ay acquired any 5 ; controlling interest in any corporation or business entity which has mined, manufactured, 6 produced, processed, compounded, sold, supplied, distributed and/or otherwise placed 7 RAW ASBESTOS o r ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS in th e stream of commerce! If 8 so, state: 9 A. The name and address of said corporation or business entity; . 10 B. The dates YOU controlled, purchased or acquired any interest; and 11 C. The nature of tire business as it pertains to asbestos, 12 RESPONSE: . 13 ' D efendant began business operations in 1904. It was incorporated in 1916 u n d er the 14 'nam e Spicer M anufacturing Corporation. In 1946, the corporation changed its nam e to 15 D ana Corporation. In 2008, u n d er a bankruptcy plan, of reorganization, Dana Corporation 16 w as m erged into D ana Companies, LLC. 17 D efendant objects to the characterization of airy of the businesses described as 18 predecessors to Defendant, In 1919, D efendant (incorporated as Spicer Corporation in 19 1916} acquired Salisbury Axle Company, h r 1954, Salisbury Axle was liquidated. -2C D efendant subsequently form ed Spicer Axle Division, Mobile Off-Highway Division, an d 1 21 Spicer H eavy Axle Division, w hich m anufactured completed axle assemblies. At custom er 21 request, som e-com pleted axles incorporated finished brake assemblies that contained 22 linings m ade w ith asbestos and other ingredients. Sales of such products ended sometime in the 1990s, although the exact date is unknow n to D efendant at this time. 2 In 1929, D efendant acquired all outstanding capital stock of Brown-Lipe Gear Com pany of 2t T 21 N 'ARKER B1J1EET XJH CA 9410: Syracuse, New York. In 1947, D efendant acquired A uburn Clutch Co., which later became Spicer Clutch Division. Spicer Clutch Division manufactured clutches, prim arily for heavy duty hueles, 20 DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLCS AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 1 th a t incorporated d u tc h facings, that m ay have contained asbestos until 1983. D efendant 2 did not manufacture the clutch facings. Non-asbestos dutch facings were available no later 3 than 1981. D efendant sold the Spicer Clutch Division in 1998. 4 In March, 1958/ D efendant acquired the stock of Chelsea Products. The stock w as 5 liquidated in 1961. D efendant subsequently form ed tire D rivetram Service Division/ w hich 6 m anufactured pow er take-offs, some of which used gaskets that contained asbestos as ' 7 components of the final product. This division was phasing out the use of gaskets that 8 contained asbestos b y the mid-1980s. Defendant presently believes that the division's last m anufacture of pow er take-offs w ith gaskets, that contained asbestos w as in. or before 1988. Chelsea Products w as sold in 2000. In 1966/ Defendant, acquired the stock o f an California corporation nam ed Victor Manufacturing & Gasket Company. The company manufactured gaskets and gasket materials for use in internal combustion engines, some of which contained asbestos as a component, In 1967, Victor M anufacturing & Gasket Company w as dissolved pursuant to and in conformity w ith relevant provisions of the California Business Corporation Act of 1933, contained at 111. Rev. S ta t Ch. 32 74-81 (1967). Victor M anufacturing & G asket Company w as not merged with Defendant. Defendant denies that it is liable fo r products manufactured by the dissolved company. In 1967, D efendant form ed Victor Gasket Division which m anufactured gaskets and gasketing materials. In approxim ately 1973, tire division was renam ed Victor Products Division. In 1993, the name of- this division w as changed to Victor Heinz Division. Some, b u t n o t all, of the gaskets Victor Products Division -made contained asbestos mixed w ith other materials, such as steel, elastomeric binder material, and copper. Some gaskets contained no asbestos and w ere always m ade of cellulose, metals, rubber, cork, and other materials. By mid-1988, asbestos w as iro longer used as an added com ponent in lire m anufacture of gaskets. In 2003, the division w as renam ed Sealing Products. Prom September 1967 until February 1969, D efendant owned the stock of Smith & K anzler Bkydon H ugo & Parker hsmain sneer SanPr2rDnidMsfrlco,CorA941OS Company, a N ew Jersey corporation incorporated in 1964 and located m Linden, N ew ' 21 ' DEPENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLCS AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANTTO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 1 Jersey. D efendant d id n o t incorporate Smith & K anzler C om pany b u t came to own its 2 stock as a result of the dissolution of Victor Manufacturing & Casket Company. Smith & 3 Kanzler Company manufactured SprayCraft. Several courts have determined that 4 Defendant is not responsible for products manufactured, sold, or distributed by Smith & 5 K anzler Company. See, e.gv D ana C orporation v. Celotex Asbestos Settlement Trust, et al,, 6 251 F,3d 1107 (6th Ch\ 2001); In re School Asbestos litigation, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7984 7 (E.D. Pa. June 14,1993); A nderson M emorial H ospital v. W.R, Grace & Co.-Conn, e t al., CA 8 No..92-CP-24-279, C ourt of Com m on Pleas, County o f H am pton, South Carolina; In re State 9 of West Virginia Public Building Asbestos Litigation, Civil Action No. 86'0458, Circuit 10 C ourt of M onongalia County, W est Virginia. In February, 1969, less than 18 m onths after 11 acquiring the stock of Smith & K anzler Company, D efendant sold the stock to P hilip Carey 12 Corporation (Ohio), 13 In 1973, D efendant acquired the stock of Formsprag. It m erged w ith D efendant in 14 1975, and Form sprag Division w as form ed, Form sprag Division m anufactured industrial 15 clutches and flexible couplings. Some of the clutches w ere assembled w ith facings that 16 contained asbestos. The facings w ere n o t m anufactured' by Defendant. In tire 1970s, 17 Form sprag became p art of D efendant's Industrial Pow er Transmission Division, in 1991, 18 Form sprag became p art of W arner Electric Division. D efendant sold tire flexible couplings 19 p art of the business in 1993. D efendant sold the industrial clutch business in 2000. 20 In 1977, D efendant acquired the shares of W eatherhead Company. The com pany 21 m anufactured hydraulic fittings a n d hose assemblies, w hich did not contain asbestos. This 22 business w as sold in 2002. 23 In 1977, D efendant acquired Williams Air Control, which became know n as the 24 Fluid Controls Division, Fluid Controls Division m ade exhaust brake lines, which 25 incorporated rings and gaskets, some of w hich contained asbestos. D efendant presently 26 believes that die division's last m anufacture of such products was in or before 1988. 27 D efendant sold the Fluid Controls Division in 1998. 28 22 r:gu DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LfiCS AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 1 In June 1979, D efendant acquired die stock of Wix Corporation. It m erged into 2 D efendant in 1984 and the Wix Division w as formed. It m anufactured and sold 3 afterm arket automotive filters, a small percentage of w hich contained gaskets that 4 contained asbestos as a component. Defendant presently believes that die division's last 5 m anufacture of filters w ith gaskets containing asbestos w as in 1988. 6 In 1980, D efendant acquired the stock of Tyrone, w hich m anufactured hydraulic pum ps. 7 The pum ps are not believed to have contained asbestos. This business was sold in 8 February 2000. 9 In July 1981, the assets of tw o Boston Industrial Products businesses w ere acquired, 1-Q- Boston Industrial Products m ade and sold conveyor belting and rubber flat goods which 11 did n o t incorporate asbestos. D efendant sold this portion of Boston Industrial Products in 12 1997. Boston Industrial Products' other line of business w as hoses, w hich did not 1-3 incorporate asbestos. D efendant sold this business in 2002. 14 W ichita Clutch Com pany became a division of D efendant in 1981 as toe result of a 15 dissolution of Wilson-Wicluia, a form er subsidiary. W ichita Clutch m anufactured clutches 16 and brakes for industrial and m arine uses. Some dutches and brakes contained friction 17 .m aterials-that contained asbestos. The friction m aterials w ere n o t m anufactured by Wichita 18 Clutch. By early 1987, Wichita Clutch h a d ceased m anufacturing products w ith -19 com ponents that contained asbestos. In 1991, Wichita Clutch became p a rt of the W arner 20 Electric Division of Defendant. Wichita Clutch w as operated as p art of the W arner division 21 until the year 2000 w hen assets, including related facilities, subsidiary operations, and 22 p ro d u ct lines of Wichita Clutch, w ere sold, 23 D efendant purchased toe assets of Racine H ydraulics in 1982, and created the R adne 24 H ydraulics Division. R adne H ydraulics D ivision m anufactured industrial hydraulic valves 25 and pum ps, some of which incorporated gaskets that contained asbestos, The gaskets w ere 26 used to seal mechanical joints to prevent hydraulic fluid leakage. In 1986, Racine 27 H ydraulics began to phase o u t the use of gaskets that contained asbestos. Defendant 28 Briton H ugo & Parker 135MaimSTREET 20 Floor ism Francisco, CA presently believes that toe division's last m anufacture of valves and pum ps with gaskets " 23 DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S AtvffiNDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 I that contained asbestos w as in 1988. A portion of Racine H ydraulics Division was sold in 2 1988. The rem aining portion of the division m erged into G resen H ydraulics, w hich w as 3 sold in February 2000. .4 In May, 1985, D efendant purchased Royalfiex Hose. Royalflex m anufactured hoses 5 and became p art of the Boston Industrial Products Division. 6 In 1985, D efendant acquired the stock of W arner Electric Brake & Clutch Company, w hich 7 m erged into D efendant in December 1986, W arner Electric Division m anufactured electric 8 clutches, electric brakes, electric wheel brakes, and other products. Some W arner Electric 9 products were assembled with-facings that contained asbestos, which w ere assembled into 10 clutch, rotors and brake m agnets, in w heel brake linings and actuating m agnets. W arner 11 Electric Brake & Clutch Company- began a program in 1983 to phase out Ere use of 12 com ponents that contained asbestos. By the Spring of 1986, W arner Electric ceased 13 m anufacturing electric clutches, brakes, and clutch/brakes w ith friction m aterial that 14 contained asbestos as a component. In 2000, the assets of W am er Electric w ere sold, 15 . In 1993, D efendant acquired the stock of a com pany nam ed Heinz Wisconsin G asket 16 Com pany. Tire company m anufactures and m arkets gaskets from gasket m aterials m ade 17 by others, C urrent available inform ation is that this subsidiary phased out asbestos in the 18 early 1990s, w ith the last use of gasketing m aterials containing- asbestos in 1993. j 19 INTERROGATORY NO. 28: 20 State w hether THIS DEFENDANT, betw een 1930 and 1985, h as ever engaged in the 21 following activities w ith regard to RAW ASBESTOS, and if so, state the inclusive dates-of 22 such activity; I 23 A. M ining; 24 B. Milling; 25 C. Supply; 26 D. Im porting; 27 E. Processing; 28 F. Distribution; 24 DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LUC'S AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 1 A. State the business addresses and nam e of the CONTRACT UNIT; 2 B. State the inclusive periods of lime the CONTRACT UNITS w ere w orking in 3 ae GEOGRAPHIC AREA; ' 4 C. State the name and address of each job site within the GEOGRAPHIC AREA 5 n d tire dates the CONTRACT UNIT w orked at those job sites, and, IDENTIFY the RAW; 6 tSBBSTOS and/or ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS installed or rem oved on each 7 occasion; 8 D. Either (1) attach all DOCUMENTS evidencing the inform ation sought in this 9 nterrogatory and its subparts to jrour answ ers to these Interrogatories, or (2) attach disks1 io' ontaining such data, or (3)de$cribe such DOCUMENTS w ith sufficient particularity that 11 he}? m ay be m ade the subject of a request for production o documents. 12 RESPONSE: 13 See Response to Interrogatory No. 42, which is incorporated herein as if fully 14 ewritten. 15. NTERROGAT OR Y N O . 44: 16 W hen do YOU contend that THIS DEFENDANT first became aware that there is an 17 issodation betw een asbestos exposure and disease in hum an beings? 18 IESPONSB: 19 It is not possible to state precisely if or w hen a corporation can be said to have such 20 cnowledge; th at is a mixed question of fact and law. Knowledge or awareness cannot be 21 m puted to D efendant based upon the know ledge or familiarity of an employee or agent of 22 Defendant, A lthough it is not possible to respond to this interrogatory w ith any degree of 23 :ertainty, D efendant understands that as early as the 1930s there w as medical literature 24 eporfcmg on individual cases and textile m anufacturer plan t experience. These reports 25 nvolved asbestos textile m anufacturing p lan t em ployees w hose w ork environm ents w ere 26 largely uncontrolled and could have exceeded hu n d red s of asbestos fibers p er cc. The 27 disease associated w ith these intensely high exposures was asbeslosis. At no time has 28 Victor Products Division m ade, m anufactured, or sold end products that could cause such 40 CER r DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLCS AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS-' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 4105 1 intensely high exposures, nor does Defendant believe that such exposures occurred at its 2 m anufacturing facilities. N or has Victor Products Division ever m ade or sold products that 3 contained asbestos intended for use by any trades other than those utilizing gasket or 4 gasket materials. At all relevant times die available data has shown that gaskets and gasket 5 m aterials th a t contained asbestos axe not hazardous to w orkers' health. 6 It is n o t possible to pick a specific time o r date w hen it w as know n that certain 7 distinct diseases were causally related to exposures to certain types and/or levels of If exposure. Defendant understands that pleural plaques and thickening, asbestosis, lung 9 cancer in association w ith asbestosis, and mesothelioma were all causally associated w ith LO exposure to certain' types of asbestos fiber and levels of exposure as of the inception of 11 Victor Products Division in 1962. D efendant does deny th at all fiber types cause 12 m esotheliom a and that asbestos exposure causes cancer other th an as listed above. 13 D efendant also denies that any asbestos-related disease occurs as a result of exposure to 14 gaskets an d gasket materials of the type m anufactured and/or sold by Defendant. 15 INTERROGATORY NO. 45: . 16 H ow do YOU contend that THIS DEPENDANT first became aware that there is an 17 association betw een asbestos exposure and disease in hum an beings. 18 RESPONSE: IS See -Response to Interrogatory No. 44, w hich is incorporated herein as if fully 2C rew ritten. . 21 INTERROGATORY NO. 46: 21 - Either (1) attach all DOCUMENTS evidencing the inform ation u p o n which YOUR 21 contentions in YOUR answers to Interrogatories No. 44 and 45 are based, or (2) attach disks 1l containing such data, or (3) describe such DOCUMENTS w ith sufficient particularity that 21 they m ay be m ade the subject of a request for production of documents. 2t RESPONSE: . 2' See Response to Interrogatory No. 44, which is incorporated herein as if fully rewritten. Information responsive to this interrogatory may be derived from Defendant's 41 DEFENDANT DANA COMPANIES, LLC'S AMENDED RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL DEFENDANTS PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO. 129 v erificatio n I, Marcy Duncan, am the former Sales Operations M anager in the Sealing Products I Division of Defendant Dana Companies, LLC and am authorized to make this verification on its behalf, I have read the foregoing Dana Companies, LLC's responses and objections to Plaintiff's interrogatories and know its contents. No single employee, officer, or agent of defendant has direct knowledge of the documents and information necessary to supply each and every response. I verify that the responses are true based on my personal knowledge as well as that based on information assembled by authorized employees o f defendant, I am informed (hat the review of documents by and information from authorized employees of defendant support the responses based upon the information available as to the date of my signature. I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct Date i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 22 23 EXHIBIT "F" 24 25 26 21 28 | '// ` >r*. JOEao, fD,, i* / c o ^ 0^ AT(0 *^TRA-Co m p a NV -, _ k ^ -- --._ / COMMN/C-;ATfON oi***, CMC - OSHA fc* L*in A yo<a >ve ,, *^r servie* U*P *.w h >r ^ Asokjti'ip W* * "" * * * . A I*** Motors , ^ - PPned UflaccenKiM, i ' ^ P ^ io r h >ou,,,., ,, * j" addiUwi- ht ijuesu; tbat-n , " *"" e * ' i* - a ,, Mutll> - *^'^5i*-r , l , l m . 0Ct ^ situacincomd 18 " 1-- T . ^ t: , * r&r ^ F- ^Anann/hjp ^ ^zcJ&^ jj; . ^ /Cy .-ye#'/' r 4U y Z~Ce* PLAINTIFF'S exhibit __ J L i SL-o, to ^ 'J & L t a S s^?~<r<r7JL\ / ,/' ^ VPD-I -0002119 1 2 I 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT "G" W h a t W ill R e p l a c e A s b e s to s G a s k e ts ? By John E. Zeitz REPRINTED FROM July 1980 rj% re U T ra i? i= i u j fl a ^ l VPD - 42-0002632 W h a t W ill R e p l a c e A s b e s to s G a s k e ts ? By John E. Zeitz B A S K E T suppliers and gasket material pro ducers have been working lor several years on prog rams to develop asbestos-1 ree gasket materials for uso in all the sealing needs ol vehicular and Industrial applications. And the lempo ci! this developmenl Is Increasing. Asbestos has been an tmporlanl part ot gas ket materials since the advent ot Iha Internal combustion engine. It has a number ot good characteristics, and has been used extensive ly. These good characteristics are the physi cal properties ot asbestos, such a s high heat resistance, excellent crush resistance, dlmenlional stability, and the ability to be pro duced into a homogeneous product. i he ability to produce a homogeneous prod uct Is greatly aided by the material's high suilace area per. unit weight, a faclor as high as 60 sq. ILIgram (5.6 migrami. Added to these physical properties, relatively low cost and ease ol processing must be included among the advantages ol asbestos. John le n t is division chirf eninenr al the yicior Produis Divaioo p/ Dona Corporation. Howevei, there are a number ol disodvanIage5wllh the material. First, there is growing emphasis on cosily preventive health and control substance programs required tor or those handling the materials. There is also a growing belief on the parl Intluential users and producers ot asbestos products, as wen db outside groups, lhal the use oi asbestos In automotive and-other vehicles should be cur tailed. The eosl ol company-wide health programs and controlling the environment in which asbsstos is handled is causing many to seek al ternatives to using the product. One problem lor ail suppliers and users ol asbestos prod ucts Is bow the end user disposes of the prod uct. In the gaskel business this is a particulariy-sensitlve area because alien the end user finds himself using a wire brush or sci ap ei to scrape asbestos oil ol an engine pail lo dean up resiaue gasketing. Untortunalely. it is ihe asbestos you cannot see that finds Its way into the lungs So unless special preventive health procedures are lollowed. Ihe end user ol asbestos gaskets may be in more potential danger than Ihe person nel iri the producer's facility. This could be particularly true In large yokrne engine re build opera Hons. Government regulalor)' agencies are keenly Interested m seeing asbestos usage curtailed, or eliminated Irom industrial and commercial pioducts. ThougTrno timetables have been set, It Is very likely a special license or waiver will be needed a s early a s 1985. And, by 1990, the use of asbeslos may not be permitted Under any circumstances. It may be lhal government regulations alone may evenluafiy-toice Ihe eHmlnalion ol all asbasics from areas wbei e il is-ncrw used -- In cluding gashets. The number ol regulatory agencies controlling asbeslos eonlinues lo grow. There are primarily six federal agencies concerned wilh asbestos. There are ihe Envir onmental Pfolecilon Agency (EPA), the De partment Ol Transportation (DOT), the Con sumer Protection Saieiy Commission (CPSC), ihe Mine Salety Health Administration (MSHA), (he Occupational Salety and Health Administration (OSHA), and Ihe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Among Ihese six agencies, approximately 20 regulations have been promulgated lo control VPD-142-0002633 / exposure ol asbestos bom various sources. Added to these are the many international and stale regulations, and Ihe regulatory sit us lion is ceiieinty challenging Another disadvantage ol asbestos is ils scar city Compared lo oil, the U.S. is mote comoletely dependent on torsion sources lor as bestos then >t is lor petroleum Although gen eral asbestos supplies seem dequela the long grades su ch as number 4 and 5 fiber lengths used extensively for gasket materials have been in tight supply loi me past lour years The Imel disadvantage ot asbestos ts mat it does no', always solve 3lt the problem- that it is ashed lo solve In short, bettei heat resis tance seatabillty end crush resistance are often requited Asbestos has served us well and writ continue to do so but there are mole and more demands lor better srMtOjis At present. Ihe majority ol gaskets in the U.S. do contain asbestos. Most ol llrem contain 8 0 % asbestos in tneir composluon with the rest being polymer binctei system s and itefS. The problem oi replacing asbestos is-oi very lame magnitude. However, belorewe gel into reviewing what is being done lo replace as bestos. we should probably conerdei whsl the asbeslos suppliers aiexurrenlly saying abou Ihe situation They Slate very simply, that once the material reaches the consumer, the asbeslos is cesses used totnckmeda-ninuiabeyturIhee. various Gwn ed, pro this may be true, but it is very ditficull tor moot gasket suppliers lo verity that this condhion continues throughout the use or the product when they consider the asbestos-contained material is typically sheared, tom, calender ed, scraped sanded, punched burned, toon- ed, compressed, and ground In its lurlher manuiaeture and use as 3 gasket. Because ot the disadvantagesmentioned and the iack ol technical verification ol Ihe safety ot tire material when processed and used as gasketing seveial major domestic users have embarked upon programs to eliminate asbes tos gaskets trom their produc, lines, le s e x amine what asbestos-tree matenats will have tp do when they replace asbestos products in oaskels Fleptacemeni materials will have to have high-heat resistance. exceHent crush re sistance, dimentional stability, end homogen eity A s examine products another reference point, those currently we shou available ld m the marketplace. These are cellulose, anaero bics. RTV, and mbbei-coaied steel. A number ol companies have ettminaied as bestos gasketing, and gaskets tri general, trom their current assemblies. The General Motors Corporate V-6 has only two gasket ap plications m Ihe engine-, tha cyimrier head gasket and the intake manifold gasket. Both ol these applications are with asbestos con taining materials. Many transmission manutacluferE ate Biso eiirrMfiaung gaskets trorn ,,their assem b le s and-ieplacine Iheni w/th li* oyid sealant lo reduce Ihe lolei&nCfcS inquir ed lor assembly. This permits them to d&vetop quielei'funning transmissions end gear boxes -- another upcoming regulation Asbestos seem s to be used m the maidiity ot cylinder head appllcalions and m'ake mani- told applications, exhaust manifold applica tions. and a large number ot extremely heavi ly loocteo Ranges Howevei. the enheal ourremenis oi these various applications are not the sam e 1/om application to application Cylinder head and intake manifold a p e t o ' S ^ & V r^ ^ tions require materials having good homogeneily and the resulting conlormability that peimits a good tluid seal. Exhaust manifold appli cations require the high-heal resistance char acteristics ot asbestos and heavBy loaded tlanaes require Ihe crush and extrusion resis tance ot asbestos. So is possiblej o replace asbeslos in OlHerent ways for dhlerent ap plications More importantly, tl appears that we could improve certain properlies m certain applications, we oould present design engi neers and the marketplace with an improved product wild greater appeal For years gasket material producers and de sinners have atlempied lo Improve the binder system s in gaskets. This work was done be cause ihe binder system appeared lo be Ihe limiting ingTecSent in gasket functional design. Little was done to improve Ihe fiber charac teristics end lo obtain Increased lunchonal characteristics through Ihis melhod. We are now looking at that 8 0 % ot Ihe gasket which represents the fiber lo see whal can be done in.replacing asbestos to Improve Us lunchonal charaelerisiics. However,, to do this, one quickly linds that no single man-made liber or other high temperature material approaches asbestos in Its crucial physical properties. It is therefore necessary to blend materials to obtain the desired properties. The types ol materials blended are mainly various libers and hllers, although rubber coated steel is also considered an alternative. Clay is one such lifter. 11 is inexpensive, com pressible in bulk, and fills Ihe voids between Ihe larger libers ol glass, nylon, or aramid Clays "are easily dispersed >n mixtures ol water From a sealing point ol view, the clay reduces the spring rate ol the lacing, and impioves Ihe loan bearing capabilities Jernperature resistance is above 9000 F (16*19 C). asbeslos from many staling prod' *' -- HotM r Clay, when -added to most materials, in creases Ihe su/lace area lo Ihe magnitude ol asbeslos. Clay has better contormabilily-pro pernes lhan asbesetos. Mica is basically s-liller, also, and has been used lor years in Ihe paper industry Vermicu lite is the thermal oi chemically expanded lorm ol mica which is very economical, has high surface area, and good lemperalure re sistance {above 2000 Fj n has relatively low strength, but good slip characteristics, caus ed by the low coeflicienl ol liiclion ol Ihe pailicle Mica has bellei loique and heat resis tant properties than asbeslos. Graphite has the highest heal resistance ol Ihe materials presently under consideration with ihe tensile strcnglh increasing until 4000 F and heal resistant above 5000 F. Th,e mater ial is very cosily but can be used in layers. The unique tow Irrctional characteristics -ol the platelets help where motion is a problem. G la ss liber is another candidate. It normally endures heal lo 1100 F. where sottening and lusing takes place However, (I has good strength and Ihe thinnest diameter or highest surlace area oi any man-made liber, II wsl be used lo reintorce mica, clay or barytes based compounds in.the same way as aramids and nylons will'be used. In some applications cellulose libel may be favored Bui it is used vary spanngly, it at all. in matenals requiring high temperature resis tance because ot its low charring tempeialuie In applications where heal is not above 300 F, however. Ihe liber can be used as a successlul camei web or matrix lor a variety ol litters VPD-142-0002634 Organic fibers also have potential Aramlds sucn as Kevlar and polyamides sued as Nomex ate examples ot current organic fi bers- These fibers have tremendous tensile strength and modulus, and yet some grades are relatively flexible. Although these mater ials begin degrading at 5CKJ F, they do not disinleornlc or gasify and al 2000 F have htghai strength than asbestos and are being used in compounds in small quantities. High strength or engineering ceramics have possibilities, too, allhough there are technical problems on how the ceramic libers are bond ed together. Ceram ics ars typically metal ox ides, nitrides, or carbides and have a temper ature range ot up to 3000 F, and compressive strength which is more than twice that of as bestos. A l these temperatures the binder ayslerns disintegrate and il is necessary lo still keep the ceramic together. In addition, cera mic libers are 30 times Ihe diameter oi asbes tos, so homogeneity is a problem; but for nigh temperature exhaust g a s applications .ns te an acceptabls'altemBtive when blended with other fibers. Coated metals will also find a niche. They have ihe physical slrengfh oi Ihe sitostrate metals coated with a well bonded yel embossable sealing coating ol nitiile or silicone. There is no wicking because of Ihe solid steel barrier as w e i as good relaxation properties and good extrusion properties. A s a result oi current programs, we can pre dict that in exhaust and turbocharger applica tions graphite, ceramic libers and filters, and mica', combined with stainless steal substrales, will be popular materials. For cylinder head and intake mantfold applications, we see the use ot organic fibers and binders and inorganic tutors Termed by a paper making process and also combined to metal sub strates, embossed steel or aluminum with high temperature coatings will continue to be used where engine structure permits. In high load and high extrusion gasket appli cations, the most prevalent materials wilt be rubber coated steel, cellulose libers with elas tomeric binders, glass fiber willi titers and elastomeric binders, densilted organic libers and tillers with elastomeric binders, and liquid systems such as FITVs and anaerobes The final cost ol non-asbestos materials is siMl not resolvfed. Material suppiiets have been given a target oi less than two limes what we are paying for material today and most feel com tortable with this. Since the asbestos-bee material makes up only portion of the gas ket's cost, ihe total sailing price should be sig nificantly less than twice current pricing, in Ihe long term, il is expected that asbestosIree products with improved properties will set! lor no more than current products -- cer tainly on a total enyine package basis. The trick to replacing asbestos is to blend the fibers and fillers and polymers to reduce the cod and optimize Ihe physical and chemical properties using multivariable analysis. Arid the Initial results took excellent Currently, as bestos tree versions o! Victor's pcputai viciocor, Solicor, Victopac, Cortpestos, and Coratnic materials are being sampled and tested by 0.ET. diesel and gasolina mamilacluiers in the .S. and abroad and compare favorably in pertormanne to existing materials. The cur ien! price structure Is considered attractive. VPTM42- 0002635 Prinltd U.5> 1 2 EXHIBIT "H" 26 27 28 NOV. 28, 2&D5 4: 21PM 4552480362 " NO. 19V )-- P. 3/ 45- 1 Bchvard R. Hugo, Bsq, [CSB Ho, 1248391 Donna L. Maul, Bsq. [CSB Ho, 191119] 2 Roland E, Th, Esq. [CSB No', 1645101 BE.YDON HUGO & PARKER 3 135 Main Street, 20filFloor San Francisco, CA 94105 4 Telephone.' (415) 808-0300 Fax Ho,: (415)808-0333 5 Attorneys for Defendant . 6 DANA CORPORATION 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 10 IHRE: Case No.: CQC-84-828684 u COMPLEX ASBESTOS LITIGATION 12 STANDARD INTERROGATORIES TO ALL 13 orS S PUXSUOTto aW EItAl 14 15 PRELIMINARY S T A T E M E N T 16 Defendant Dana Corporation b providing these amended responses-to interrogatories pursu 17 ant to San Francisco Superior Court General OrderNo. 129, That Order provides that defendants 18 shall respond to the standard interrogatories without ny objections except for objections based upon 19 privilege. 20 These interrogatories seek information about events that occurred many years ago, These 21 responses are based upon a reasonable investigation into the relevant facts and information currently 22 known to Dana. These responses supersede alt prior responses to interrogatories in this jurisdiction: 23 Defendant responds to toes? interrogatories at this time for the Victor Products Division 24 (now known as Sealing Products), excluding Reinz Wisconsin Gasket Co,, for the period 1967 to 25 date, and Victor Manufacturing &Gasket Company foirthe period Defendant owned its stock (1966- 26 67).1 Dana provides information concerning VictorManufacturing & Gasket Company for the time 27 28 Bsydon JooM&ASHPSarMuTkTer Fnoousft, Ca 94(05 Victor Products Division (now known as Sealing Products), excluding Bm r z Wisconsin Gasket Co , b hereinafter referred to as Victor Products Division," 1 5 1- defendant Dana corporation's amended responses to plaintiffs' standard interrogatories to all defendants pursuant to general ORDERno. m 1 3 4 5 6 nI 8 9 10 U 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 McKenna LoJio it A ldridcs \I I P ATTORNEYS AljLLAW SanpkanckCO RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 33; Defendant does not understand itself to be a "Contractor Defendant," and therefore, this interrogatory is inapplicable. ' INTERROGATORY NO. 34; Did any of the distributors identified in your Answer to Interrogatory Nos. 29 and 31 above have an exclusive distributorship? If so, state the relevant time period. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 34; See Responses to Interrogator)' Nos. 29 and 31, which are incorporated herein as if fully rewritten, Investigation is ongoing, and-Defendant reserves the right to supplement or amend this response. INTERROGATORY NO, 35: IF THIS DEFENDANT entered into' any agreements for the rebranding of any ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCTS by THIS DEFENDANT for resale or distribution by another person or entity, describe each agreement's terms and the parties to said agreement, the duration of the agreement, and name of each produces) and/ormaterial(s) covered by each such agreement. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 35: Defendant does not presently believe that it entered into written rebranding agreements. At its customers' request, Defendant placed customer names on some gaskets and gasket packaging. ' INTERROGATORY NO. 36: As to RAW ASBESTOS and as to each such ASBESTOS-CONTAINING PRODUCT listed in YOUR responses to Interrogatories No. 29 and 31 did DEFENDANT warn of tire health hazards of asbestos? If so, state for each such warning: A, Hie content, size, color, and location; whether the warning appeared on the material and/or on the container, and/or was placed on a tag; whether the warning was included in contracts; whether the warning was included in advertising or other promotional materials. -33- D E F E N D A N T D A N A C O R P O R A T IO N 'S A M E N D E D R E S P O N S E S TO P L A IN T IF F S 'S T A N O A R D IN T E R R O G A T O R IE S TO ALL D E F E N D A N T S P U R S U A N T T O G E N E R A L O R D E R NO. 128 V B. State whether yon have any photographs thereof; C. The inclusive dates on which you used each such warning; D. State all changes you made in such warnings and the dates of such changes; and B. Identi fy the person most knowledgeable about your warnings and warning policy. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 36: The gaskets manufactured by Victor Products Division were and are safe for intended use. In accordance with federal regulations first implemented in the 1970's and as current today, Defendant's gaskets that contained asbestos did not require a warning. Defendant's gaskets and gasket materials did not require a warning for one or more of these reasons: 1) While many of Defendant's gaskets anchor gasketmaterials did not contain asbestos, in those products that did contain asbestos, the fibers were locked into the product with elastomeric or other binders; 2) The use of the gaskets was of such short duration ibat'there was-no opportunity for a meaningful exposure; 3) The type of asbestos generally used in gaskets does not create a significant risk of harm at levels of exposure associated with gaskets; 4) The gaskets were not used on a frequent basis; and 5) Historical medical and scientific evidence did not support a risk of harm from gaskets. ' Nevertheless, in response to the growing awareness of hazards of exposure to raw asbestos or friable, products that contained asbestos, and in response to some customer inquiry, in 1984-85, Victor Products Division began inserting a caution label with certain gaskets and gasket materials. The label for certain finished gaskets said substantially as follows: "CAUTION. CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS. AVOID CREATING DUST. BREATHING ASBESTOS DUST MAY CAUSE SERIOUS BODILY HARM." The label for gasket materials read substantially as follows; "WARNING..This material contains asbestos fibers. Avoid creating air borne fibers or dust. Follow OSHA work practices, including the use of appropriate dust contra! equipment. Inhalation of air-bom asbestos fibers may cause asbestosis or other serious bodily harm. Smoking greatly increases this risk of serious bodily harm." The language used in warnings may have changed over time. Mc Kenna Long fc ATATOlRdNrFidY&geATLLLPAW San Francisco ________________________-3 4 -______________________________________________ DEFEN D AN T DANA C O R P O R AT IO N 'S A M E N D E D R E S P O N S E S TO PLAINTIFFS' ST A N D A R D IN T E R R O G A T O R IE S TO ALL D E F E N D A N T S P U R S U A N T T O G E N E R A L O R D E R NO.,120 V NOV, 28,2005 4: 28PM 4152480302 NO, 1921 P, 44/45 I, Marcy Duncan, am Sales Operations Manager of the Sealing Products ^vision, of Defendant Dana Coiporation and am authorized to make this verification on its 1 ehalf. 1have read the foregoing Dam Corporation's response to interrogatories md know its contents, No single employee, officer, or agent of defendant has direct knowled :e of the documents and information necessary to supply each and ever)' response, t verii, that the responses are true based on my persona) knowledge as well aa that based on info mation assembled by authorized employees of defendant I aminformed that the review of documents by and information from authorized employees of defendant support the respons * based upon the information available as to the date of my signature, I certify under penaltyofperjury under the laws of the State of Californir feat the foregoing is true and correct. Dale 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 EXHIBIT "I" 23 24 25 26 27 28 ^DANA> DANA CORPORATION VICTOR PRODUCTS DIVISION subject INTRA-COMPANY COMMUNICATION . . .... __ SV.. asbestos vs- Non-asbestos Product DATE February 8, B 8 5 to Dick Ford$ ' The following analysis, refarenas products for' d o U a r sale, of each of the material sales. 1P84 at the top 2 3 O.E. accounts plus Customer , Total 'Sales CATERPILLAR Morton Mossville ' 16,460,000 4,244,000 Cummins $ 3,592,86D John Deere $ 3j 832,051 O.M.C. $ 543,000 J,X. Case S 6.94,100 Massey Ferguson $ 96,0.00 White Farm , . . $ 349 ,600 Waukesha $ 715-,000 AMC $ 184,000 Buick $ 540,000 Cadillac $ 300,0,00 Chevrolet $ 1,828,000 Chrysler $ 186,000 , Detroit Diesel 1>054,000 Ford ? 273,00-0- - GMWDD $ 1,977,000 Non-Asbeatos $1 ,560,000 507,400 $1 ,077,800 $ 726,800 $' 140,000 $ 70,000 $ 10-,000 $ 42,000 $ 572,000 $ 180,000 $ 54,00D $ 0 $ 91,400 $ .0 $ 31,620 $ 54,600 $ 98,850 r-i iMMiMonrMR'ti Asbestos vs Non-Asbestos Product -2- Customer' Allis Chalmers I.ff.C, Mack Truck Oldsmobile ' Pontiac Rockwell.int'l. White EnginesMaterial Sales ^o'fa'I' 'Sales $ 269,382 S' 1,355 ,000 $ 615,000 $' 1,358,600 $ 414,000 1S9,000 $ 227,000 $ 2 -,000,000 Non --Asbesto 0 $ 97,750 $ 123,000 $ 814,800 $ 165,600 0 $ 68,100 $ 30,000 _$'44v 265,^93 $6 ,'515,720 Percent Non-Asbestos 14.7% a-z/ CUMWIINS001522 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION ---- 0O0---- I i DOROTHY STUCKART, Individually and as Successor-in-interest to KEVIN STUCKART, Decedent; THEODORE STDCKART; RACHEL STUCKART; and DOES ONE through TEN, inclusive, Plaintiffs, VSl AC and S, INC., et al., No. CGC-09-275304 Defendants. -- -- ................................. .. / DEPOSITION- OF MARCELLA DUNCAN PMK OF DANA COMPANIES, LLC Taken berore Patrice E. Morrison, RMR, CRR June 34, 2012 Aiken Welch Court Reporting M. Duncan 6-14-12 d32ecc59-dd3f-4a79-9b78.684344bbc5cl3 P ag e 34 Page 36 1 A 1wasn't given any training, i visited the plants 1 A 1don't recall at that time, no, ma'am. 2 quite often and watched the production processes in 2 Q And aside fromyour tour of that facility in 1978 3 various areas, but Iwasn't hands-on trained, no, 3 during a seminar where you saw removal of gasket, 4 ma'am. 5 Q And have you ever attempted to install an 4 did you ever see removal of gaskets at an)' other ' 5 time as part of your tenure with Victor Products? 6 asbestos-containing Victor gasket yourself? 6 A I saw a lot from, like, my family and boyfriends. 7 A Not personally, no. 8 Q And have you ever attempted to remove a used 7 And in Churubusco, we had, like, a hands-on shop 8 where they would do training, mechanics training 9 asbestos-containing Victor gasket? 10 A No, ma'am. 9 and things like that. And they also did 10 presentations at the division office for mechanics 11 Q And have you ever seen anyone remove a Victor 11 and things like that. - 12 gasket that had been used and-was asbestos 12 Q Now, was this training given by Victor Products? 13 containing? 13 A One of the - usually one of the engineers, 14 A Yes, ma'am. 15 Q Where did you see that? 14 depending on what the subject was. If it wasjust 15 about the various applications and mateiial, you 16 A In the test cells at the division offices. There's 17 engine test ceils. 16 know, depended on who gave line presentations, but 17 they'd usually do presentations in the - either in 18 Q When did you first see thosetests? 18 the test cell area or in the conference room, 3 9 A It would probably have-been around 1978, when I 1 9 Q And these presentations were available to who? 20 first visited the new division offices in Lisle, 20 21 Q What was your purpose in viewing tests on removal 21 MR. CELBA: Object. Lack of foundation. Speculation. 22 of gaskets-in the engine test cells in 1978? 2 3 A 1was up for a seminar and we did a building tour 22 A I know'there were other Dana people, Ithink there 23 were some outside people, fm not sure who all, 24 and toured ail the engineering areas, and basically 24 because I didn't really pay that much attentionto 25 they showed us what they did and things like that. 2 5 them. 1didn't have to go. Page 35 P age 37 Q Do you remember seeing any tools that were used by the persons who -were removing those gaskets when you toured that facility in 1978? A im not sure what they were, but i know they used, 5 like, a flat screwdriver to pop the head gaskets ' 6 off. 7 Q Do you recall ever hearing any discussion about 8 precautions to be taken by the persons who were 9 removing asbestos-containing gaskets to avoid 10 exposure to, you know, the hazards of asbestos? 11 MR, CELBA: T'mgoing to object. 12 MR, BERNARD: Are you talking just during the 13 test removal? 14 MR. -CELBA: Also it's-argumentative in form 15 and assumes facts not in evidence. 16 Go ahead, 17 A You mean during my visit there? 18 Q Right. 19. A I don't recall. 20 Q Do you recall seeing any posted warnings on the 21 walls or anywhere in that facility concerning 22 precautions to be taken or the hazards involved in 23 removing asbestos-containing gaskets? 24 MR. CELBA: Same objection. 25 Go ahead. 1 -Q Do you know if this training, for instance, in 2 removal of gaskets by mechanics, was it offered by 3 Dana to people who didn't work for the Dana 4 company? 65 MR. CELBA: I'm going to object. Misstates ` the testimony of this witness. 7 A I don't know what all the trainings were or who all 8 the-people were that attended. 9 Q And you don't know if Dana offered this training, 10 was my question, to people outside of the company. 11 MR, CELBA: Same-objection, Foundation. 12 Speculation. 13 A. I don't know about Dana. At that facility, it was 14 Victor Products, and l`m not sure who all the 15 people were that received any kind of training or 16 ,, education on our products. Q Ifyou could pul! - before 1get into the notice itself, the categories, Jjust want to talk about a couple of exhibits here that 1marked, No. 5, and it's the Intra-Company Communication to Cummins, 00512 at the bottom. Could you pul1that out? A Yes, I have it. Q Have you ever seen this document before? A Yes, I have. Q Was tiiat at a prior deposition? Aiken Welch Court Reporting 10 (Pages 34 to 37) M. Duncan 6-14-12 Ct32ecc59-ctd3f-4a70-9b78-684344bhc5d$ Page 38 Page 40 ; 1 A Yes, ma'am. 2 Q Is this a document that was prepared by the Dana 3 Corporation in its normal course of business? 4 MR. CELBA: I'm going to object Foundation, 5 Speculation. 6 Go ahead. 1 A The document was prepared by a Victor Products 8 Division employee and -- 9 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Pm sorry. 10 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry? 11 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Counsel, can we have 12 that document, what exhibit number? 13 MS, VILLASENOR: No. 5. 14 BY MS. VILLASENOR: 1 5 Q I'm sorry, ma'am. `Were you finished with your 16 answer? 17 A You asked-i-f-this w as a docum ent that was prepared 18 in the normal course o f business for Victor? 19 Q Well, it says Dana Corporation and also Victor 2 0 Products Division on the top, and my question is, 2 1 is this a document that was prepared in the normal 2 2 course o fBusiness by D ana Corporation, and Til 2 3 add th e V ictor Products Division*. 24 MR. CELBA: Same objections. 2 5 A For the Victor Products D ivision, there were all P age 39 1 A No, ma'am. I 2 Q Did you ever see this document while you were still | 3 employed with Victor? I 4 A Not that I recall, no. . 5 Q Does Mr. Beuscher still work for the Dana 6 Corporation in any of its divisions? 7 A No, ma'am. He's been retired for many years. > 8 Q Do you know'approximately when he retired? i 9 A Fie was retired when I came back to the division in ? 10 1988. I don't know'exactly for how1long. I think ' 11 just a couple years. 12 Q Is he still alive, as far as you know? 13 A As far as 1know, yes. 14 Q And how about Mr. Forde? Is he still with the Dana 15 Corporation in any of its divisions? 16 A No, ma'am. He's also been retired for several 17 year-s. 18 Q And approximately-when did he retire? ; 19 A I'm not sure, because he left our division and went ; 20 to another division. Fmnot really sure, but it ; 21 was after 1 came back to the division in '88. ; 22 Q Relative to some ofthetenns, the words that we ; 23 see in-this document, 1wanted to ask you some : 2 4 questions. Underneath the name Dick Forde, it says 2 5 "The following analysis covers the dollar sale of Page 41 1 kind of different reports done for various reasons. 2 Thisjust lookslike one of them. We did alot of 3 different reports duringthe normal course of 4 business. 5 Q Do you have any reasonto doubt that this is a business record for the Victor Products Division of '7 Dana Corporation? 8 MR. CELBA: Same objection. A No, ma'am "q Do you know-who the author is? And ifyou look on 11 the second page, Mr, Jim, I think its Beuscher? 12 A Beuscher. 13 Q Beuscher. Thank you, Do you know that gentleman? 14 A Yes, I do. 15 Q And what was his titie with -- was it Victor 16 Products? 17 A Yes, ma'am. 18 Q What title did he hold? 19 A At that time, he was the general sales manager for 2 0 the Victor Products Division. 21 Q And who w'as Mr. Dick Forde, F-O-R-D-E, or Forde? 22 A It's Forde, and Dick Forde was the general manager 23 of the Victor Products Division at that time. 24 Q Did you have any involvement in assisting with the 25 preparation of this intra-company communication? 1 each of the reference products for 1984." 2 Do you know what they're referring to when 3 they say reference product? 4 MR CELBA: Object. Foundation. Speculation, 5 Document speaks for itself. 6 A No, ma'am, I don't. 7 MS. VILLASENOR: And just to respond to the i 8 objection, I'm not sure that it does speak for | 9 itself; Counsel, because I don't see reference : 10 products defined, but TBkeep going here. j 11 Q This appears to be areport for the year 1984, and j 12 that w'ould be total sales for the year of 1984; is ; 13 that your understanding? 14 MR CELBA: Same objection. T5 A It says that its 1984 for the top 23 OE accounts 16 plus material sales. 17 Q And "OE" meaning original equipment? 18 A Yes, ma'am. 19 Q And so would that mean original equipment 2 0 manufacturers as opposed to --or let me askyou. 21 Is that just original equipment manufacturers? 22 MR. CELBA: Same objection. , 23 A It would be the original equipment, or vehicular, \ 24 you know', the people who are making the original ; 25 equipment that the product w'ent i n t o . ________ ; 11 (Pages 38 to 41) Aiken Welch Court Reporting M. Duncan 6 14 12 d32ecc59-dd3f-4a79-9b78-68<l344bbc5d; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 EXHIBIT "J" 23