Document zoxz15xMyJn48QD7v46D8nmez

c LAW OFFICES JOHN J. CUNEO Trust Company of N. J. Bldg. 921 BERGEN AVENUE JERSEY CITY. N. J. PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT telephone journal Square 2>om*oi33 October 3, 1937. CN Charles U. Price, Esq., c/o Scott, MacLeish & Falk, Esqs., c/o United States Gypsum Company, 300 '.vest adams Street, Chicago, Illinois. //' *( i My dear Mr. Price Re: Wetzel vs. Rational Asbestos Mfg. Co. Mr. John a. Scharwath has suggested that I write you concerning a claim of asbestosis made by a former employee of his with the thought in mind that by reason of your experience in cases such as this, you may be able to offer some suggestions which may be of value to us in defending this suit. The facts briefly are these: Mr. Wetzel, the olaintiff in this matter, was employed as an assistant bookkeeper in the office of the National Asbestos Mfg. Co., being employed by them for a period of three or four years. On occasions he had to enter the factory where actual manufacturing took place. Subsequent to the time that National .asbestos Mfg. Co., sold their business to the United States Gypsum Co., Mr. Wetzel proceeded to institute suit claiming that as the result of the nature of his work he contracted a disease known as asbestosis. He further claims that he was caused to inhale asbestos dust which circulated about the office and that there was improper ventilation which failed to remove such dust from the air. V;e have no precedent in this State on such a case and are proceeding along the same lines as silicosis C ci S 6 S * I am informed by Mr. Scharwath that you defend ed a somewhat similar suit and was successful therein. I would therefore appreciate your informing me on what theory you defended the suit in which you were involved, what exoerts you used ana whether you have any record of the proceedings 'which you could forward me. GP028 0L75 Mr. Clemens Scharv.ath, who is now connected with the United States Gypsum Comoany, informed me some time ago, that a suit defended by you on behalf of United States Gypsum Co., was on the theory that there was no such disease known as asbestosis. In this connection I might say that although we have no precedent on an as- c( LAW OFFICES JOHN J. CUNEO Trust Company of N. J. Blog. 921 BERGEN AVENUE JERSEY CITY, N. J. TELEPHONE JOURNAL SQUARE 2>M^0193 Charles M. Price, Esq. -2- October 3, 1337. bestosis case, physicians whom I have consulted agreed that they recognize asbestosis as a disease somewhat akin to silicosis. Any suggestions that you can offer in this connections will be greatly appreciated. Very tiruly ycn/z J JC*M GP028 0196