Document rxj1nRODrYM9kXe70ryg0BxX0

P0RZ10,BROMBERG & NEWMAN, P. c. litigation. Business ConnseHuy & Environmental Law COUNSELORS AT LAW 100 SOUTHGATE PARKWAY P.O.BOX 1997 MORRISTOWN, NJ 07962-1997 TELEPHONE (973) 538-4006 FAX(973) 538-5146 263 DRUM POINT ROAD BRICK, NJ 08723-6399 TELEPHONE (732) 262-9238 FaX<732) 262-9267 156 WEST 56TM STREET NEWYORK.NY 10019-3800 TELEPHONE (212) 265-6888 PAX (212) 067-3983 Writer's Direct Dial No.: 973-SS9-4201 writer's E-mail address; djcampbell@p8NIaw.com Website address; wivwjfbnlaw.com PRINCIPALS STEVEN P- BENENSON* ROBERT J. BRENNAN USA MURTHA BROMBERG D. JEFFREY CAMPBELL THOMAS R-CHESSON ROY ALAN COHEN ROBERT C. EPSTEIN FRANK FAZIO VITO A. CACUARDI. JR.*1 lauren e. handler EDWaRD a. hocan ANITA HOTCHKISS WILLIAM A. KRAIS CONNIE A. MATTEO JAY R. MCDANIEL KENNETH R. MEYER JOHN M. NEWMAN HOWARD J. SCHWARTZ THOMAS SPIESMAN CHARLES J.STOIA OF eOlINJBL MYRON J. BROMBERC ROBERT MUIR. JR* ALVIN WEISS* COUNSEL CHRISTOPHER P. DEPWUIPS CHARLES E. ERWAY, SI JEFFRY H. KOENIG LAURA H. THORNTON* auanyounc ASSOCIATES JOSHUA H. ABRAMSON MARY-aUCE BARRETT JAMES C.BAXTOLOTTO HEATHER L BROWN* JOSEPH C.CaLELLA LYNETTE J.CaRHART JOHN T. CHESTER* LAURA C CONWAY GARINEH S- DOVUETTAN TAMMY FAHMI ELISABETH W. GEHRINGER BORDEN R.GILUS JACQUELINE GREENBERG THOMAS O. JOHNSTON jason rwitimore* PATRICK T.MOTTOU* TaRa A. MORPHY* JOHN A. ORLOWSKI THOMAS J.RATTAY* UNDa PISSOTT RE1G JENNIFER A. ROMANSKI JENNIFER A. SCHETTTNO DINA L.SFOR2A STEPHEN WARD SMITHSON* MICHAEL D. SOUSA* RONALD E. STEINVURZEL CHRISTINA H. WANC * JENNIFER FISHER WEISS MICHAEL C WEBS* IVAN J.WHITTENBURG* Daniel k. winters Ralph porzio (1662-IM8) N.J.AN.Y. BARS *N.J. BaRONUT August 24, 2001 VIA FACSIMILE Allen Vaught, Esq. Baron & Budd, PC 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue Dallas, TX 70219-4281 Re: Kinsey v. Owens-Coming et al. . Our File No.: 00532-37116 Dear Allen: I am in receipt of your letter of this afternoon which was received by our office at 4:34 p.m. central time. I am somewhat mystified by some of the positions that you take in your letter given the discussions that you have had with various members of this office over the past two weeks. I am also surprised that you consider your letter to be a fulfillment of your discovery conference obligations under Rule 191.2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Contrary to your assertion, it had been our understanding that all discovery disputes had been resolved and that ASARCO and Capco were providing discovery as agreed to by your office. Although you assert that neither Capco nor ASARCO has responded to written discovery, Capco's answers to the Kiker Plaintiffs' Master Interrogatories and Requests for Production were served on Thursday, August 23, 2001. Moreover, ASARCO's answers to the Kiker plaintiffs' Master Interrogatories and Request for Production were served earlier this afternoon. It was our understanding, based on your representations earlier this week, that we should get these responses to you "as soon as we could" but "certainly by the end of this week." We have 537506 Allen Vaught, Esq. August 24,2001 Page 2 PORZIO,BROMBERG & NEWMAN, P.C. satisfied this request. You also note in the final paragraph ofyour letter that you granted a "time extension until August 16, 2001 for ASARCO and Capco to respond to the Kiker Plaintiffs' Master Interrogatories and Request for Production." As you are aware, no such extension was given; August 16 was the original due date. As you are also aware, on August 22, 2001, ASARCO responded to written discovery propounded by plaintiffs' counsel Lanier, Parker & Sullivan. Those discovery responses included the production of21 boxes ofdocuments which were responsive not only to the specific inquiries of the Lanier discovery, but also to the discovery served by your office on behalf of the Kiker plaintiffs. Finally, you raise the topic of the deposition notice of the corporate representative of Capco Pipe Company, Inc. Pursuant to discussions with you during the week of August 13, 2001, and with your consent, we scheduled that deposition for Tuesday, August 28, 2001. In a conversation with this office on Tuesday, August 21, 2001, you stated that you would like to receive documents responsive to the deposition notice prior to the deposition so drat you could review them this weekend. Pursuant to your request, and in spite of die feet that large numbers of Capco documents have previously been produced to your co-counsel, we have Federal Expressed documents responsive to the deposition notice for morning delivery at your office on Saturday, Aitgust_25, 2001. Further, earlier today, we provided to you Capco's written response to the deposition notice and document request as well as notification that responsive documents had been shipped and would arrive at your office tomorrow morning. We believe that throughout this process, we have worked cooperatively with you and made good faith efforts to provide all requested discovery on a timely basis. We stand ready to present a Capco corporate representative for deposition on Tuesday, August 28,2001. We look forward to seeing you at the deposition on the 28,h. If you are unable to attend the deposition, please notify us on Monday. As I will be out of the office early next week, please direct any additional correspondence on this matter to Ken Meyer or Jennifer Schettino. cc: G. Murr S. Stubbs 537506