Document nm6bryQayjwYQ91mvVor64n1G

( SULLIVAN & CROMWELL NEW YORK TELEPHONE: (2121 556-4000 TELEX: 62694 'INTERNATIONAL), 127610 {DOMESTIC1 c PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT JMftC-329 42$ Shcadi&ee 40004 250 PARK AVENUE. NEW YORK IOOI7 1775 PENNSYLVANIA AVE..WASHINGTOK.D. C.2O0OS r7. AVENUE MATIGNON. 75008 PARIS 21 IRONMONGER LANE. LONDON EC2V QJB October 9, 1981 Ken-Caryl Ranch, Denver, Colorado 80217 - 8 ^82 Re: Texas Asbestos Litigation Fiber Supply to Denison, Texas Dear 1-lr. Wilson: I understand from Mike Tabor that you will be handling Johns-Manville's Denison, Texas litigation, including various matters that Mike and I have been discussing over the course of several months. Under the circumstances -- and at the risk of burdening this letter with papers -- I felt I could make our discussions more productive by attaching copies of the principal documents. Because this matter has been pending for several months, I am interested in reaching a resolution expeditiously. As Mike may have mentioned to you, he and I have been discussing J-M's grounds for identifying my client, Turner & Newall Limited, as a supplier of asbestos in the Downs and Gage cases. It is T&N's view that J-M's response to plaintiff's interrogatory number 59 is misleadingly over- ` broad and that T&N is not a proper defendant in these actions. I have attached a copy of this interrogatory response for your convenience. (Exhibit A) On July 9, 1981 Mike Tabor sent me a copy of various Denison plant "batch books" and indicated that T&N had been identified as a supplier on the basis of the informa tion contained in those materials. (Exhibit B) Based upon our review of the batch books, we concluded that nearly all (. Rodger Wilson, Esq. ( .-2- of the fiber grades identified as "T&N fiber1' were, in fact, asbestos fiber grades mined and sold by unrelated companies, the Cape Asbestos Group of Companies. The only fiber usage that is likely to be connected with T&N occurred during a period vrhen neither of plaintiff's decedents in the Downs and Gage cases was employed by J-M. Our position is set forth in greater detail in my letter to Mike Tabor dated July 28, 1981. (Exhibit C) I would like to discuss with you how best to correct the impression created by J-M's overbroad interrogatory response that Glen Gage and Charles Downs were exposed to fiber supplied by T&N. .1 propose that we discuss this matter during the'.week of October 19 and consider whether this matter can be handled by supplemental interrogatories, along the lines suggested by my draft in Exhibit D. I am interested in resolving this matter shortly, so that we can avoid the necessity and expense of deposing the J-M personnel responsible for the preparation .and accuracy of J-M's response to interrogatory number 59. Very truly yours. (Attachments) Lindsay H. Lew *3 SULLIVAN & CROMWELL NEW YORK TELEPHONES <11*) S3S-AOOO TELEX: 2*94 (INTERNATIONAL), I27RIS (DOMESTIC) CARLE ADDRESS: LADYCOURT* NEW YORK Michael D, Johns-Ma Ken-Ca Denv 125 Broad Street, New York 10004 ISO PARK AVENUE, NEW YORK 10017 1773 PENNSYLVANIA AVE. WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000S 17, AVENUE MATIGNON, 78O0S PARIS 21 IRONMONGER LANC, LONDON EC2V SID July 23, 1931 Dear Mike: We have corapleted our rwiew of tire Denison "batch books" that you sent to rue iVrr' obis month. You indicated in your letter of July 9, 1931 thSfc believes that tire following asbestos fiber grades were supplied by Turner & rjewali: CSG3, CGS, GSA grades (A, B, Cl and S Slue), Govern ment Blue, Anosite M and Araasite i 1 ) Hi i>n Jj 111 confirms that nearly all of these fiber types were in fact supplied by other, unrelated companies. TfiN has brokered fiber designated "C&G3" to J-M from time to tine until November 1965. Accordingly, the "C&G3" mentioned on tire Universal Atlas Cements note paper dated October 30, 1964 probably refers to fiber supplied by T2I. The other references to C&G3 (December' 14 and 20, 1966 and ( Michael D. Tabor, Esq. 2- January 5, 1967), occur well after the last date that T&N brokered this fiber and, therefore, those references almost certainly relate to fiber supplied from other sources. I am told that there is no fiber grade "CGGS* and believe that the "S" is a ty al error of the number "3." None maining fiber types were sold by T&N to J-H or the U nxnent -- directly or indirectly -- at any time-. As the enc3^5ed Utochure indicates, each of these fiber types were supplied by me Cape Asbestos Group of Com panies (see clipped oac^for^aist of fiber types). Moreover, the conclusion that these fiben^yptes were purchased by J-M directly or indirectly fronthe Qapeyroup is suggested by J-M*s own records. I have enclosed materials produced at the deposition of H. Blechar, Downs v. Jehns-Manville Corp., No. S-78-145-CA (Nov. 30, 1979), demonstrating that Cape Group companies (Cape Blue Mines, Egnep ancNorth American Asbestos Corp.) supplied many of these types directly to J-M. As detailed above, only the single use of C&G3 in 1964 is likely to be connected with T&N. Under these circum stances, T&N does not appear to be a proper defendant in either the Downs (decedent employed 8/4/53-6/25/59 and 10/19/59-1/12/60) or Gage (decedent employed 9/1/66-9/5/75) cases. In responding to plaintiffs* interrogatory number 59, A Michael D. Tabor, Esq however, J-M listed T&N as a supplier of fiber to the Denison plant without qualification. I would like to discuss with you how best to correct the impression created by this over broad answer that Glen Gage and Charles Downs were exposed to fiber suppli Very truly yours. (Enclosure Lindsay K. Lew COPY FORM Rnv'WTjMIjSER )() ,Cl?Lj 43- L-TT" j INITIALS SEGMENT NO, NOTES I DATE REQUESTING PARTY