Document rgoyopb50w7L947zNqkRa6R7

4 Et hyl Gasol ine Coisol at ion 25 liO Aim -AV N e w To UK IN R E P LY PLEASE R E F E R T O 3.W. Webb Br. Bobert A. Kehoe College of Medicine Bden &Bethefda Aves. Cincinnati, Ohio April IE, 19E? Bear Br. Kehoe:- bas sued the Standard Oil Company, claiming to have "been permanently injured as the result of the Bay way trouble. It is the only suit nowpending and since it has been brought in the federal court it cannot, so I amadvised, he reached for trial until next fall. This man is a brother of Br. Callis, who was and still is, a chemist connected with Mr. Howard's laboratory at Bayway, but for some reason unknown this has not been at'all friendly, even before he instituted mis suit. His attorney is a Mr. Brown, who appeared as the attorney in a number of other suits, some of which were settled for fairly substantial sums. This Information was, of course, massed on and through Mr. Brown he recently presented as his roclc bottom figure a settlement for $20,000. 'Then the matter was re cently submitted to me for my view as to what should be done I wrote Mr. Howard, as per enclosed copy. As the result of my letter, Mr. Brown has arranged for Is examined by you on Friday or Saturday of this week. I was pleased to get your telegram last night that you could make the examination on Saturday, and Mr. Brown was accordingly advised this morning. I understand Hanson,'- Kentucky, w h e i s living, ia a very small place and no street address is deeine^necessary to he given to locate him. However, it might be well for you to let me knowby wire when your train will arrive in Hanson- so that Mr. Brown may he informed and pass the word on to I didn't knowwhen I wrote my letter of March 29th to Mr. Howard whether you would care to have on^ofyour associates accompany you or not, and I don't knowwhether'flBHB expects us to have two doctors present. However, you can handle thJ^Yn whatever way seems to you the most suitable. I feel sure that if for any reason you would like to take oneo^vour assistants along with you there will he no objection on MrflH0J^part. However, if there should he, the assistant could simply absent himself from the examination and you could go on with It alone. WE 0017485 1 Dr. So b e rt . Kehoe Page -2 Ap ril 12 , 1927 Enclosed is the history of from the files of the Standard. Vas obtained I would not be at all surprised if Mr. should attempt to construct, in theory at least, a formidable case. He natu rally realizes that it is up to him to put his best foot forward in respect to his alleged disability, as well as his symptoms. He natu rally expects us to base,to some extent at least, our counter offer upon the impression that he makes by reason of this, examination. Obviously, we are anxious for you to get as much information as to his history as you can obtain, as we purpose checking up on any of his statements relative to employment, etc., since leaving the Standard Gil Company. In this connection we, of course, would like to have you get from him any information as to any treatment, giving the name of the doctor, etc., for fcllow-up purposes. With kindest regards. I am Sincerely you: m a. Enc. r->v' March 29, 1927 Hm -t . - F.W. '"ebb rs. Standard Mr. Frank 1. Homard, , Standard Development Company 26 Broadway ,, NewYork, N.T... Dear Mr* Howard " 1 I think we should not make any counter-offer to that made by Mr. Brown, referred to in the letter of Mr. Faulks' dated the 23rd inst., until we know more about It may be one of those cases, particularly in view of the fact that it is the only one pending, which will have to be taken to the courthouse steps to bring home to Mr. ^ H ^ th a t there must be at least some basis for substantial settlement. Despite some large sums that have been paid to people whom^|^0Beali zes perhaps were not injured more than he, never theless, I think it would be evidence of supreme weakness on our part if we; made a counter-offer of a substantial sum, say $7^500 or .$10,000, without taking the pains to find out more about him. I would like to suggest that Mr. Brown be informed that we will not make any offer until we have had a physical examination of his client. If he will consent to such examination I think it could be conveniently arranged for Dr. Kehoe and perhaps an associate to go to Kentucky from Cincinnati over one of the weekends betweau now and May 14th. If such examination is made it will be likely that^HHBin his history will give us some data upon which further investlgsrHonmight be made as to his activities since leaving your employ in August 1925. ' ^ I amreturning Mr. Faulks* letter addressed to Mr. Johnson of the 23rd inst. but amkeeping the history record f^HflHBI which was attached to the letter, for future reference, which ITMnop^LS agreeable toAyou. . . ' , . , . Yours very truly, CH HE 0017487 l e Employed September 19, 1924 as a Specialty Plant Helper at a rate of 85-l/8^ per hour He continued in the Ethyl Plant until he, went out sick, which first took place on October 28, 1924. On that date he was sent tothe Reconstruction Hospital in the afternoon. His service record at Bayway Refinery shows he was married; age 24 years; high sbbool education. .. ......... 2. Absent from October 28, 1924 to December 1, 1924; on January 10th and 11th, 1925; and on Jamary 21, 1925. He therefore lost 52 shifts and 38 calendar days of disability. The total amount of benefits paid during temporary total disabil ity amounted to $237.12 and in addition there was paid a differential during the time this man was on certified temporary partial disability. 3. The Ethyl Plant was closed on Saturday, October 25, 1924 and on October 28th with others he was sent to the Reconstruction Hospital. He was discharged from Re construction Hospital on November 14th with orders to return for reexamination on November 19th. 4. On November 19th Dr. Sinclair reported - "Sleeps about 4 hours daily; bowels regular; appetite fair." On this same day the Reconstruction Hospital reported that it would be advisable for him to undertake some light work, the same as in the Puller case. 5. On November 20th Dr. Lowe reported - "Nausea; sleeps poorly; nervous and poor appetite. To report to Reconstruction on December 3, 1924". 6. On November 25th Dr. Lowe reported - "Don't sleep; throat sore; no congestion." 7. Resumed half days on light work on December 2nd. 8. Out half day January 10th; cause unknown. 9. On January 12th Dr. Lowe reported - "Does not sleep well; three or four hours a night; occasional headaches." 10. On January 21 Dr. Lowe reported - "Out again account of epistaxis. Claims spits up blood at times; given a sputum cup." 1 1 . Examined February 3, 1925 at which time "blood pressure was 12o/ dO; pulse 80; appetite good; has gained 15 lbs. since leaving hospital." Ordered to resume regular duties. . 12. Sputum reported negative by Board of Health on February 4, 1925. 13 On February 26th seen by Drs. Denno and Thompson at which time his blood pressure was 150/90; weight 188 lbs.; temperature normal. Drs. Denno and Thompson felfc,that this man should be continued on light duties until further notice. 14. On March 23rd he had gained 3 l/2 lbs., then weighing 191-1/2 lbs; complained of occasional nose bleeds; blood pressure then 150/80; slight tremor; no vertigo; occasional headaches; pulse rapid (100) hut always nervous under examination; temperature normal; complains of cough; physical findings not distinctive; given another sputum cup. XU 0017488 -2 - 15. Oil'April 1st Dr. Lowe reports:- "This man shows continued improvement; pulse 34; temperature normal; no vertigo; tongue clean; blood pressure 120/70. It is suggested period of partical disability cease; that is to say. that he be returned to full duties. 16. OnApril 3rd Dr. Lowe reports - "Specimen of sputum sent to Elizabeth Board of Health". On 4/2/25 reported as negative for tuberculosis. 17. OnApril 23rd was approved for regular work by Dr. Denno. 18. OnAugust 14, 1925 left the employ of the Company with Fahey. CONCLUSIOH; . After reviewing the above facts in this case, Dr. Denno is of the opinion that Callis has little, if any, permanent disability. However, in view of Ms history, it would seem that possibly his claim has more merit than that of Fuller. This decision is arrived at in view of the fact that the Reconstruction Hospital never made the definite state ment that this man was symptom'free; the further fact that his visits from time to time to the Company Doctor showed complaints directly referable to lead poisoning; and further because at Dr. Denno*s examina tion on February 26, 1925 he was not considered ready for full duties. H 0017489