Document vBo4nnwyOwBv4XeMoEN0ab3J6

NO. 92-13997-L WILLIAM JOBE DICKIN and HELEN E. DICKIN, MARY BELL JOHNSON, WILLIAM R. TAYLOR and S s s CATHERINE TAYLOR, LAURA HARRIS, $ Individually and as Personal $ Representative of the Heirs S and Estate of WALTER EDWARD S5 HARRIS, Deceased, LOWELL JOHN TOMPKINS and EMMA LEE TOMPXINS and JULION DALE 8PEEGLE, SR. S s s and EUNICE I. SPEEGLE, Plaintiffs, versus KEENE CORPORATION, et al.. s s s s s s IN THE DISTRICT COURT DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 193RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEFENDANT UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY'S ANSWERS AMD OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' INTERROGATORIES To: Laura Harris, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Heirs and Estate of Walter Edward Harris, Deceased, by and through her attorney of record, Mr. Russell W. Budd, Baron & Budd, P.C., The Centrum, 3102 Oak Lawn Ave., Ste. 1100, Dallas, TX 75219. COMES NOW, UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY, Defendant in the above-entitled and numbered cause, and files the attached Answers and Objections to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories. Respectfully submitted DeHAY & ELLISTON, L.L.P. 1500 Maxus Energy Tower 717 North Harwood Street Dallas, Texas 75201-6508 Telephone: (214) 953-5454 DAVID W. CROWE State Bar No. 05164250 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY PEFEWPftNT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES Fi\ASB3\USCDXCKXN.ROC PAGE 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document has been forwarded to counsel for Plaintiffs, Mr. Russell W. Budd, Baron & Budd, P.C., The Centrum, 3102 Oak Lawn Ave., Ste. 1100, Dallas, TX 75219, by Certified Mail, return receipt requested, on this day of jmy, 1994. DAVID W. CROWE BEEEMPANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F: \ASB3\USGDXCKXN.ROG PAGE 2 PREFATORY STAT1 n United states Gypsum Company (hereinafter "U.S. Gypsum") has, to the best of its abilities, gathered non-privileged documents into a document repository for inspection by plaintiffs' counsel in response to requests for production served in asbestos litigation. These documents provide information that supplements and expands upon that provided in these answers to Interrogatories. Accordingly, by way of further response to these Interrogatories, U.S. Gypsum hereby offers to make available these documents at a mutually convenient time at its offices at 125 S. Franklin Street, Chicago, Illinois. In giving its responses to Interrogatories as to asbestos- containing products, U.S. Gypsum refers to products containing commercial asbestos as part of their formulation and to the type of commercial asbestos used as part of the formulation. OBJECTIONS U.S. Gypsum objects to the manner in which plaintiff has defined U.S. Gypsum to the extent that plaintiff purports to include in its definition of U.S. Gypsum predecessors-in-interest, subsidiaries, and successors-in-interest of the corporate defendant. In that U.S. Gypsum Company is the named defendant, this definition is overly broad and would require U.S. Gypsum to engage in unduly burdensome research, divulge privileged information and produce privileged documents. This defendant. United States Gypsum Company, responds to these Interrogatories on behalf of itself. DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F:\ASB3\USGDICKIN.R0G PAGE 3 U.S. Gypsum further objects to these Interrogatories to the extent they seek information or documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product rule and to the extent they seek trial preparation or expert materials or documents. Finally, U.S. Gypsum objects to these Interrogatories to the extent they ask for "identification" of voluminous documents on the ground that they are overly broad, unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. As set forth infra. U.S. Gypsum will produce documents which are the proper subjects of an appropriate document request. DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F: \ASB3\USGDICKIN.R0G PAGE 4 ANSWERS AND OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORIES INTERROGATORY NO. 1: For each document listed below, please answer such document is a true and correct duplicate of a genuine and authentic document: PESCPIPTIQN a) USG152 Letter 8/18/78 Ellenbogen Freeman to b) USG155 C) USG156 d) USG157 Lab Notebook, 9/13/60 Letter 12/7/79 Freeman to Causey "Asbestos Study for Research Center, United States Gypsum Company, Des Plaines, Illinois" NATLSCO, 7/21/72 e) USG159 Memo 10/17/73 J.W. Walker to J.D. Cornell f) USG162 1952 to brochures 1959 Miscellaneous &KSWEB; - a) USG 152: This defendant admits that this document is genuine, authentic, and an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. b) USG 155: This defendant admits that this document is genuine, authentic, and an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. c) USG 156: This defendant admits that this document is genuine, authentic, and an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. d) USG 157: United States Gypsum Company admits that this document is an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company, was prepared at the request of United States Gypsum Company and was received by it at or near the time of the event. United States Gypsum company has made reasonable inquiry and the information known or readily obtainable by it is insufficient to enable it to either admit or deny that the document is genuine, authentic, a business record of another company or organization, was made at or near the time of DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F:\ASB3\USGDXCKXN.R0G PAGE 5 the event, was made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity or was the regular practice of that business activity to make the document. e) USG 159: This defendant admits that this document is genuine, authentic, and an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. f) USG 162: This defendant denies that this document is genuine or authentic, but admits that it is an accurate copy of genuine and authentic individual pages of separate in-house business records found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company and attached together by plaintiffs as one exhibit. INTERROGATOR* NO. 2_: For each document listed below, please answer whether such document was kept and/or generated in the regular course of a regularly conducted business activity of any United States Gypsum Company Entity by an employee or representative of any United States Gypsum Company Entity with knowledge of the act, event. condition or opinion recorded. KmEBUttk. a) USG152 DESCRIPTION; Letter 8/18/78 Ellenbogen Freeman to b) USG155 Lab Notebook, 9/13/60 c) USG156 Letter 12/7/79 Freeman to Causey d) USG157 "Asbestos Study for Research Center, United States Gypsum Company, Des Plaines, Illinois" NATLSCO, 7/21/72 e) USG159 Memo 10/17/73 J.W. Walker to J.D. Cornell f) USG162 1952 to brochures 1959 Miscellaneous ANSWER? a) USG 152: United States Gypsum Company admits that this document is its business record and was prepared by or at the direction of United States Gypsum Company. United States Gypsum Company admits that this document was made at or near the time of DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F:\ASB3\USGDICKIN.ROG PAGE 6 the event by- or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge and was made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity and that it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the document. b) USG 155: United States Gypsum Company admits that this document was prepared by or at the direction of United States Gypsum Company, that the document was made at or near the time of the event and that it was made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity to make the documents. United States Gypsum Company denies that all statements made in the document were made by or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge, and United States Gypsum Company therefore denies that this document is a business record and reserves the right to object to the admission into evidence of such document as hearsay. c) USG 156: United States Gypsum Company admits that this document was prepared by or at the direction of United States Gypsum Company, that the document was made at or near the time of the event and that it was made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity to make the documents. United States Gypsum Company denies that all statements made in the document were made by or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge, and United States Gypsum Company therefore denies that this document is a business record and reserves the right to object to the admission into evidence of such document as hearsay. d) USG 157: United States Gypsum Company admits that this document is an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company, was prepared at the request of United States Gypsum Company and was received at or near the time of the event. United States Gypsum Company has made reasonable inquiry and the information known or readily obtainable by it is insufficient to enable it to either admit or deny that the document is genuine, authentic, a business record of another company or organization, was made at or near the time of the ten event, was made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity or was the regular practice of that business activity to make the document. e) USG 159: United States Gypsum Company admits that this document was prepared by or at the direction of United States Gypsum Company, that the document was made at or near the time of the event and that it was made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and that it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the documents. United States Gypsum Company denies that all statements made in the document were made by or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge, and United States Gypsum company therefore denies that this document is a business record and reserves the right to object to the admission into evidence of such document as hearsay. DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F:\ASB3\USGDICKIN.R0G PAGE 7 f) USG 162:- This defendant denies that this document is genuine or authentic, but admits that it is an accurate copy of genuine and authentic individual pages of separate in-house business records found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company and attached together by plaintiffs as one exhibit. United States Gypsum Company admits that the individual pages of this document are its business records which were prepared by or at the direction of United States Gypsum Company. United States Gypsum Company admits that these pages were made at or near the time of the event by or from information transmitted by a person with knowledge and were made in the course of a regularly conducted business activity and that it was the regular practice of that business activity to make such pages. INTgRROGMLO^Y NQ. ?: For each document listed below, please answer whether such document was found in your files in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity. EXHIBIT-NO*. a) USG152 DESCRIPTION Letter 8/18/78 Ellenbogen Freeman to b) USG155 Lab Notebook, 9/13/60 c) USG156 d) USG157 Letter 12/7/79 Freeman to Causey "Asbestos Study for Research Center, United States Gypsum Company, Des Plaines, Illinois" NATLSCO, 7/21/72 e) USG159 Memo 10/17/73 J.W. Walker to J.D. Cornell f) USG162 ANSWER: 1952 to brochures 1959 Miscellaneous a) USG 152: Objection. This Interrogatory is vague and ambiguous with respect to "in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity." Without waiving this objection, this defendant admits that this document is genuine, authentic, and an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. PETBNPAKT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F:\ASB3\USGDICKIN.ROG PAGE 8 b) USG 155: Objection. This Interrogatory is vague and ambiguous with respect to "in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity." Without waiving this objection, this defendant admits that this document is an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. c) USG 156: Objection. This Interrogatory is vague and ambiguous with respect to "in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity." Without waiving this objection, this defendant admits that this document is an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. d) USG 157: Objection. This Interrogatory is vague and ambiguous with respect to "in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity." Without waiving this objection, this defendant admits that this document is an accurate copy of a document found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. e) USG 159: Objection. This Interrogatory is vague and ambiguous with respect to "in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity." Without waiving this objection, this defendant admits that this document is an accurate copy of a document found within tdie files maintained by United States Gypsum Company. f) USG 162: Objection. This Interrogatory is vague and ambiguous with respect to "in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity." Without waiving this objection, this defendant denies that this document is genuine or authentic, but admits that it is an accurate copy of genuine and authentic individual pages of separate in-house business records found within the files maintained by United States Gypsum Company and attached together by plaintiffs as one exhibit. INTERROGATORY HO. 4: Has United States Gypsum Company stipulated or agreed to the authenticity of any of the documents referenced in Interrogatory No. 1 with any person prior to the date of these interrogatories? ANSWER: a) USG 152: Objection. This Interrogatory is overbroad, irrelevant, immaterial, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiver of its objections, U.S. Gypsum responds that it has not stipulated or agreed in this action to the authenticity of this document. DEFENDANT'S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES Ft\ASB3\USGDXCKIN.ROG PAGE 9 b) USG 155: Objection. This Interrogatory is overbroad, irrelevant, immaterial, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiver of its objections, U.S. Gypsum responds that it has not stipulated or agreed in this action to the authenticity of this document. c) USG 156: Objection. This Interrogatory is overbroad, irrelevant, immaterial, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiver of its objections, U.S. Gypsum responds that it has not stipulated or agreed in this action to the authenticity of this document. d) USG 157: Objection. This Interrogatory is overbroad, irrelevant, immaterial, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiver of its objections, U.S. Gypsum responds that it has not stipulated or agreed in this action to the authenticity of this document. e) USG 159: Objection. This Interrogatory is overbroad, irrelevant, immaterial, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiver of its objections, U.S. Gypsum responds that it has not stipulated or agreed in this action to the authenticity of this document. f) USG 162: Objection. This Interrogatory is overbroad, irrelevant, immaterial, and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiver of its objections, U.S. Gypsum responds that it has hot stipulated or agreed in this action to the authenticity of this document. DEFENDANT * S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES F:\ASB3\USGDICKIH.R0G PAGE 10 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) COUNTY OF COOK ) SS VERIFICATION I, F. M. Poremski, declare: I an the Director, Financial & Accounting Services, of United States Gypsum Company, one of the above named defendants, and am authorized to make this verification for and on behalf of said company; I have read the foregoing Answers, Objections, and other Responses to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and am informed and believe that the same is true and on that ground allege that the matters therein stated are true. I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on \\ ^ \ in Chicago, Illinois. F. M. Poremski