New Jersey Mesothelioma Lawyer Rachel Placitella Forces Asbestos Company to Admit Knowledge of Asbestos Dangers

1
1 SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
2 LAW DIVISION – MIDDLESEX COUNTY
3 DOCKET NO. MID-L-2994-09 AS
4 JAMES JOHNSON and MARY
5 JOHNSON, Husband and Wife, DEPOSITION UNDER
ORAL EXAMINATION
6 Plaintiffs, OF
MARY DOMBROWSKI WRIGHT
7 v.
8 3M COMPANY, et al.,
9 Defendants.
10
11 Computer-aided transcript of the videotaped
12 deposition testimony of MARY DOMBROWSKI WRIGHT
13 taken stenographically in the above-entitled
14 matter before EDWIN SILVER, Certified Court
15 Reporter and Notary Public of the State of New
16 Jersey, at the offices of Cohen, Placitella &
17 Roth, P.C., Two Commerce Square, 2001 Market
18 Street, Suite 2900, Philadelphia, PA 19103, on
19 Thursday, November 19, 2009, commencing at 11:10
20 a.m.
21 BRODY DEPOSITION SERVICES, INC.
22 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS
23 7 ELM STREET
24 WESTFIELD, NJ 07090
25 (908) 789-2000

2
1 A P P E A R A N C E S:
2
3 COHEN, PLACITELLA & ROTH, P.C.,
4 BY: RACHEL A. PLACITELLA, ESQ.
5 127 Maple Avenue
6 Red Bank, NJ 07701
7 For the Plaintiffs
8
9
10 LAVIN, ONEIL, RICCI, CEDRONE & DiSIPIO,
11 ESQS.
12 BY: JOHN J. BATEMAN, ESQ.
13 190 North Independence Mall West
14 Suite 500
15 Philadelphia, PA 19106
16 For Defendant 3M Company
17
18
19 LAVIN, ONEIL, RICCI, CEDRONE & DiSIPIO,
20 ESQS.
21 BY: CAROLYN L. McCORMACK, ESQ.
22 190 North Independence Mall West
23 Suite 500
24 Philadelphia, PA 19106
25 For Defendant IBM Corporation

3
1 A P P E A R A N C E S (CONTINUED):
2
3 SALMON, RICCHEZZA, SINGER & TURCHI, LLP
4 BY: JOHN J. DUGAN, ESQ.
5 Tower Commons
6 123 Egg Harbor Road
7 Suite 406
8 Sewell, NJ 08080
9 For Defendant Beazer East, Inc.
10
11
12 MARKS, ONEILL, OBRIEN & COURTNEY, P.C.
13 BY: DANIEL A. BAYLSON, ESQ.
14 Cooper River West
15 6981 North Park Drive
16 Suite 300
17 Pennsauken, NJ 08109
18 For Defendant Georgia Pacific
19
20
21 PORZIO, BROMBERG & NEWMAN, P.C.
22 BY: JUSTIN C. HALLBERG, ESQ.
23 100 Southgate Parkway
24 Morristown, NJ 07962-1997
25 For Defendant Warner-Lambert Co., LLC

4
1 A P P E A R A N C E S (CONTINUED):
2
3 HARRIS BEACH, PLLC
4 BY: ABBY H. VOLIN, ESQ.
5 100 Wall Street
6 New York, NY 10005
7 For Defendant Kentile Floors, Inc.
8
9
10 MORGAN MELHUISH ABRUTYN, ESQS.
11 BY: ROBERT J. MACHI, ESQ.
12 651 West Mount Pleasant Avenue
13 Suite 200
14 Livingston, NJ 07039-1673
15 For Defendant Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.
16
17
18 WILBRAHAM, LAWLER & BUBA, ESQS.
19 BY: IAN T. KINGSLEY, ESQ.
20 24 Kings Highway West
21 Haddonfield, NJ 08033-2122
22 For Defendant Unilever
23
24
25

5
1 A P P E A R A N C E S (CONTINUED):
2
3 HOFHEIMER, GARTLER & GROSS, LLP
4 BY: GARY N. SMITH, ESQ.
5 530 Fifth Avenue
6 New York, NY 10036
7 For Defendant Rapid-American.
8
9
10 CARUSO, POPE, EDELL & PICINI, ESQS.
11 BY: WOLODYMYR P. TYSHCHENKO, ESQ.
12 60 Route 46 East
13 Fairfield, NJ 07004
14 For Defendants CertainTeed, Notte, and Union
15 Carbide
16
17
18 PRESENT:
19 NEW JERSEY CERTIFIED LEGAL VIDEOGRAPHY
20 BY: GERARD J. GENNA, VIDEOGRAPHER
21
22
23
24
25

6
1 I N D E X
2 WITNESS PAGE
3 MARY DOMBROWSKI WRIGHT
4 Examination by Ms. Placitella 14
5
6
7 EXHIBITS
8 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENT.
9 P-1A Notice to Take Deposition and 120
10 Demand for Production of
11 Documents, dated 8/26/09,
12 3 pages
13 P-1B Notice to Take Deposition and 120
14 Demand for Production of
15 Documents, dated 8/26/09,
16 3 pages
17 P-2 Deposition transcript of Mary 120
18 Dombrowski Wright taken in the
19 Mon Mass II asbestos litigation
20 on 6/27/97, 116 pages
21 P-3 Deposition transcript of Mary 120
22 Dombrowski Wright taken in the
23 Gregory v. A.W. Chesteron, et al.,
24 asbestos litigation on 3/1/06,
25 395 pages

7
1 EXHIBITS (CONTINUED)
2 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENT.
3 P-4 Deposition transcript of Mary 120
4 Dombrowski Wright taken in the
5 Wendt v. Asbestos Defendants (BP)
6 litigation on 3/10/08, 59 pages
7 P-5 Koppers Company, Inc. Safety 121
8 Plan, Revised 2/17/54, 11 pages
9 P-6 N.J. Department of Labor & 121
10 Industry, Bureau of Engineering
11 & Safety, Safety Regulation No. 3,
12 Establishing Threshold Limit
13 Values for Dusts, Vapors, Fumes,
14 Gases and Mists, Effective 10/30/58,
15 14 pages
16 P-7 Sweets Architectural Catalog 121
17 File, 1959, pertaining to
18 Koppers Company, Inc., 30 pages
19 P-8 Defendant Beazer East Inc.s 121
20 Responses to Plaintiffs
21 Supplemental Interrogatories,
22 dated 11/5/09, certified to by
23 Mary Dombrowski Wright, 32 pages
24
25

8
1 EXHIBITS (CONTINUED)
2 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENT.
3 P-9 1953 Memberships and 121
4 Representatives of Koppers
5 Company, Inc., 35 pages
6 P-10 IHF Annual Report 1975, 16 pages 121
7 P-11 Deposition transcript of Charles 121
8 Flickinger taken in the Greco,
9 et al. v. A-Best Products Company,
10 et al., asbestos litigation on
11 6/11/98, 80 pages
12 P-12 Mellon Institute of Industrial 122
13 Research, University of Pittsburgh,
14 Progress Report, dated 9/15/42,
15 signed by Francis R. Holden,
16 1 page
17 P-13 Mellon Institute Industrial 122
18 Hygiene Digest, October 1955,
19 60 pages
20 P-14 Mellon Institute Industrial 122
21 Hygiene Digest, February 1956,
22 41 pages
23
24
25

9
1 EXHIBITS (CONTINUED)
2 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENT.
3 P-15 Mellon Institute Industrial 122
4 Hygiene Foundation Minutes of
5 Annual Membership Meeting,
6 10/26/61, and Summary of 1961
7 Activities, 18 pages
8 P-16 Letter dated 12/21/77 from 122
9 Braun to Kennedy, with attached
10 members of IHF Board of
11 Trustees, 4 pages
12 P-17 1946 Partial Membership Roster 122
13 of American Ceramic Society,
14 1 page
15 P-18 Johns-Manville Internal 123
16 Correspondence dated 12/7/73,
17 from Hendry to Hutcheson,
18 39 pages
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

10
1
2 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION BY MS. PLACITELLA:
3 PAGE LINE
4 110 10
5
6
7 WITNESS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER:
8 PAGE LINE
9 46 13
10 91 3
11 91 8
12 100 19
13 101 12
14 101 18
15 103 13
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

11
1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on the
2 video record in the matter of James Johnson
3 versus 3M Company, et al.
4 Todays date is November 19th, 2009.
5 Time is approximately 11:16 a.m.
6 This is the video-recorded deposition
7 of Mary Wright from Beazer East, Inc. Its
8 being taken at Cohen, Placitella & Roth in
9 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
10 Jerry Genna is the camera operator.
11 Ed Silver, from Brody Court Reporting
12 Services, is the court reporter.
13 This is Docket No. MID-L-2994.
14 Please administer the oath.
15 And appearances will all be noted in
16 the transcript.
17 M A R Y D O M B R O W S K I W R I G H T, duly
18 sworn, testifies as follows:
19 MR. DUGAN: Rachel, before we get
20 going, I just wanted to put a brief
21 statement on the record.
22 MS. PLACITELLA: Sure.
23 MR. DUGAN: Weve been served,
24 meaning we Beazer East, Inc., my name is
25 John Dugan, counsel for Beazer East, with

12
1 two notices to take depositions in this
2 matter.
3 The first seeks the representative of
4 the Defendant with the most knowledge
5 concerning the use of asbestos and/or
6 asbestos-containing products at the Koppers
7 Coke building located in Kearny, New Jersey
8 during the 1950s, and the second seeks the
9 person with the most knowledge concerning
10 this Defendants historical knowledge of the
11 dangers of asbestos.
12 With respect to the first notice,
13 based upon Mr. Johnsons deposition
14 testimony that he worked at the Koppers
15 facility where mothballs or moth flakes were
16 manufactured, we have determined that that
17 facility, the subject facility, was what was
18 known as the Koppers Meadows plant in
19 Kearny, New Jersey, which was sold in 1962.
20 I think I previously advised Miss
21 Placitella that theres only limited
22 information, since that plant was sold more
23 than 45 years ago. But based upon the
24 corporations obligation to provide a
25 designee with information thats known or

13
1 reasonably available, we have designated
2 Miss Wright as the witness in response to
3 both deposition notices, and shes here
4 today for that purpose.
5 But again, like I said, theres
6 limited information thats available, and
7 shell testify accordingly.
8 MS. PLACITELLA: Thank you. I–I did
9 receive your Answers to Interrogatories and
10 your Answers to Demand for Productions,
11 where that information was detailed very
12 clearly. I appreciate that statement.
13 MR. DUGAN: Okay.
14 And the only other statement I would
15 put on the record, I understand there may be
16 some exhibits marked or used in todays
17 deposition.
18 To the extent that they werent
19 documents that I produced in response to
20 discovery, I made a request to Miss
21 Placitella earlier to view copies of those
22 deposition exhibits that she planned to use
23 prior to the deposition. She has declined
24 at this point.
25 And just for the record, Im

14
1 reserving the right to object to the use of
2 those exhibits. I also think its unfair
3 that given the fact that they havent been
4 produced in discovery prior to todays
5 deposition.
6 MS. PLACITELLA: I note your
7 objection. And regarding any documents that
8 you have not seen or Miss–Mrs. Wright has
9 not seen, Ill be happy to take a break and
10 show the documents to you.
11 MR. DUGAN: Okay.
12 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay. Are we ready
13 to begin?
14 MR. DUGAN: I believe we are.
15 THE WITNESS: I think so, yes.
16 EXAMINATION
17 BY MS. PLACITELLA:
18 Q How are you today, Mrs. Wright?
19 A Im okay.
20 How about you?
21 Q Good.
22 As I just introduced myself, my name
23 is Rachel Placitella, and I represent Jerry and
24 Mary Johnson in the within matter that you have
25 received notice of.

15
1 Are you prepared to continue right
2 now?
3 A Yes, I am.
4 Q Okay. Thank you.
5 As your counsel has aptly described,
6 its my understanding that you are the person with
7 the most knowledge.
8 MS. PLACITELLA: To expedite matters,
9 what Im going to do, instead of stopping
10 every time I have a document, Im going to
11 say that this document is going to be P-1,
12 and at the break counsel and I will mark
13 all the items for identification so we dont
14 take the witnesss time.
15 Q But I show you what will be marked as
16 P-1 for identification. Mr. Dugan was kind enough
17 to–to give a summary of this deposition notice.
18 Did you have occasion to review this
19 deposition notice before today?
20 A Yes, maam, I did.
21 Q Okay. Thank you.
22 And I understand–lets talk about
23 Im going to call PA-1 (sic), which is That
24 representative…of this Defendant with the most
25 knowledge concerning the use of asbestos and/or

16
1 asbestos-containing products at the Koppers Coke
2 building located in Kearny, New Jersey during the
3 1950s.
4 And its my understanding that you
5 have been brought today as the–as the person with
6 the most knowledge on behalf of Beazer East, Inc.,
7 with the limitations that your counsel has already
8 stated for the record; is that correct, maam?
9 A Thats accurate, yes.
10 Q Okay. And then Im going to show
11 you–and there were a number of documents that you
12 are asked to produce, which we will discuss
13 later.
14 And then which I will have labeled
15 as–identified as P-1B, that is the person with
16 the most knowledge concerning this Defendants
17 historical knowledge of the dangers of asbestos.
18 And you have seen this document.
19 Correct, maam?
20 A Yes, maam.
21 Q Okay. And its your understanding
22 that–that you are here today as the person at
23 this juncture, as of 2009, as the person with the
24 most knowledge of the historic–of the dangers–of
25 the historical dangers of asbestos; is that

17
1 correct, maam?
2 A Thats correct, yes.
3 Q I understand that your deposition has
4 been taken numerous times before–
5 A Correct.
6 Q –is that correct?
7 A That is correct.
8 Q And I estimated around nine.
9 Is that a–is that correct, for a
10 ballpark figure?
11 A I–I counted this morning, and it is
12 nine, yes.
13 Q Nine?
14 Okay. Great. So I win the prize for
15 the day.
16 A On asbestos. I should qualify that.
17 Q Okay. And you testified on one other
18 time, is that correct, other than asbestos?
19 A No. I have testified several times
20 on other–in cases other than asbestos.
21 Q Okay. And what cases were those?
22 A Well, I testified in a case
23 associated with my fathers death.
24 Q Right. Im aware of that.
25 A But I also–

18
1 Q Your father had–your family had
2 brought a lawsuit for your fathers work-related
3 asbestos injuries.
4 A Thats right.
5 Q Correct?
6 A Thats right. But I also testified
7 in a case involving a contract dispute with the
8 purchaser of a division of Koppers Company in the
9 mid 80s. I have testified once or twice on cases
10 associated with coke ovens, where the injury was
11 someone being injured physically on the coke oven
12 battery itself.
13 Q Okay. I do remember reading about
14 those.
15 A Okay.
16 Q Okay. And its my understanding that
17 you graduated from Seton Hill College in
18 Greensburg, PA?
19 A Thats right.
20 Q Okay. And then you went to
21 Dubesquene?
22 How do you say that?
23 A Thats okay. Duquesne.
24 Q Oh, thats Duquesne?
25 A Yes.

19
1 Q Duquesne Law School. And you
2 graduated in 1982.
3 So youve been a lawyer for almost 30
4 years. Correct?
5 A Thank you for reminding me, yes.
6 Q Okay. Great. And what are friends
7 for. Right?
8 A Yeah, right.
9 Q And part of your employment is you
10 were an attorney representing King Building
11 Products in asbestos litigation. Correct?
12 A From 1982, when I graduated, until
13 1985, when I went in-house with Koppers Company.
14 Q Okay. And from 1985, then, you have
15 had some business relationship with Koppers and/or
16 Beazer East. Correct?
17 A Thats correct, yes.
18 Q So 1985 to 2009. Okay.
19 So is that 24 years?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Are you still an officer of this
22 corporation?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Are you still the, is it assistant
25 secretary and litigation manager?

20
1 A Im assistant secretary. Im no
2 longer litigation manager.
3 Q Okay. And when did that
4 position–when did you cease being the litigation
5 manager?
6 A In 2000.
7 Q And who is the litigation manager?
8 A There is none.
9 Q Okay. So is that all handled by
10 individual counsel, outside counsel?
11 A No. The cases that I was managing
12 while I was litigation manager, I still have two
13 of those cases pending. But most of the other
14 toxic tort cases are being handled by Jill
15 Blundon, who is our general counsel.
16 Q And shes the secretary?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Oh, okay. So shes obviously an
19 attorney as well?
20 A Yes. Shes vice president and
21 general counsel.
22 Q Its my understanding that Beazer
23 East is the holding company for Koppers Company;
24 is that correct?
25 A No. Beazer East is formerly known as

21
1 Koppers Company, Inc.
2 Q Okay. And it handles the liabilities
3 of Koppers Company?
4 A It assumed the liabilities of Koppers
5 Company–just for general background, if I could
6 do that.
7 Q Please.
8 A Koppers Company was taken over in
9 1988, and its assets for the chemical divisions
10 were sold between 1988 and 1989, and along with
11 the assets that were sold was the use of the name
12 Koppers. And so we had to change our name then in
13 January of 1989 to Beazer Materials & Services,
14 Inc., and then we ultimately changed it again in
15 April of 1990 to Beazer East, Inc.
16 So I tell people, I make the analogy
17 that its like when I was single, I was Mary
18 Frances Dombrowski, and now Im Mary Dombrowski
19 Wright, the same person, just a name change. And
20 so its very–its the same sort of thing, the
21 same corporate entity, but it had its named
22 changed twice.
23 Q I understand.
24 And its also my understanding that
25 you are a partner at a private law firm in

22
1 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, or youre no longer
2 there?
3 A No longer.
4 Q No longer there?
5 A No longer.
6 Q I guess my information is stale.
7 A Yeah.
8 Q Okay. Are you working in any other
9 capacity other than as a–an officer in Beazer
10 East?
11 A Im employed, actually, by a company
12 called Three Rivers Management, Inc.
13 Q Oh, thats correct. Right.
14 A And Three Rivers Management, Inc. is
15 under contract with Beazer East, Inc. to handle
16 all of their legacy liabilities, including their
17 asbestos litigation.
18 Q Okay. So is it fair to say that your
19 entire workday is spent on Beazer East matters in
20 one capacity or another?
21 A Thats absolutely correct, yes.
22 Q Okay. And how much time on your
23 work, say your work week is spent on asbestos
24 litigation matters?
25 A I would say 95 percent.

23
1 Q Okay. Ninety-five percent.
2 And thats at the current time?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And how–how–has it been 95 percent
5 during the entire 24 years of your history with
6 Beazer East?
7 A No.
8 Q Okay. So has it–it was less years
9 ago?
10 A Well, when I first started at Koppers
11 Company, Inc., the agreement I had with the then
12 general counsel was that I wouldnt have to work
13 on asbestos cases. And so I was doing all
14 nonasbestos work from April of 1985 until we were
15 taken over in 1988. And at that time the
16 attorney, in-house attorney who was managing the
17 asbestos litigation, his position was eliminated,
18 and I assumed all of that responsibility, in
19 addition to doing work on other kinds of cases.
20 Q Okay. So is it fair to say, then,
21 for approximately the last 20 years you have spent
22 a period of time during the workweek on asbestos
23 litigation matters?
24 A Thats absolutely fair, yes.
25 Q Okay. And are you aware of how many

24
1 asbestos-related lawsuits have been filed against
2 Beazer or Koppers since you started?
3 A Not since I started. I can tell you
4 that Ive heard we have approximately a hundred
5 and–I think 154,000 claimants that I manage.
6 Q Now, when you say claimants, are you
7 talking about third-party cases as well as
8 workers compensation cases?
9 A I dont handle any workers
10 compensation cases.
11 Q So its 34,000–
12 A One hundred fifty-four–
13 Q One hundred thirty-four. Sorry.
14 134,000 third-party cases.
15 A 154,000.
16 Q One hundred fifty-four. Sorry.
17 Okay.
18 What did you do to prepare for
19 todays deposition?
20 A Well, I specifically, for todays
21 deposition, I reviewed our responses to the
22 discovery that we filed. I reviewed the notices
23 of deposition. I reviewed–Im trying to think
24 what else. I have reviewed some documents in
25 order to respond to our discovery responses.

25
1 Q Im sorry. Could you repeat that?
2 A Sure.
3 I reviewed documents that we produced
4 in response to the deposition–Im sorry, in–in
5 response to the request for production of
6 documents specifically for this case.
7 Q So you reviewed the documents that
8 Mr. Dugan had forwarded to me in response to my
9 documents–my notice to produce?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Okay. Did you review–did you do
12 anything else to prepare for todays deposition?
13 A As I said, other than the reviewing
14 of the answers that we filed to interrogatories
15 and the deposition notice itself, then, no, I
16 dont think I have reviewed anything else.
17 Q Okay. And did you do any research?
18 A Well, I did research in re–in
19 response to–Ive done research in response to
20 other depositions. So I didnt have to redo that
21 work, if thats what youre asking.
22 Q Okay. So, in other words, the
23 statement in the Answers to Interrogatories
24 regarding the Meadow Plant or the Meadows Coke
25 Plant–

26
1 MR. DUGAN: Objection to the use of
2 Coke Plant.
3 MS. PLACITELLA: Meadows Plant? Is
4 that the correct terminology youd like to
5 use?
6 MR. DUGAN: Meadows Plant, yes.
7 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay. Sorry.
8 Strike that, then.
9 Q Counsels statement regarding
10 research that was done regarding the Meadows
11 Plant, was that done by you or someone else?
12 A That was done by my.
13 Q Okay. So in addition to reviewing
14 discovery responses, you also conducted research?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Okay. And what specifically did you
17 do?
18 A We have approximately 27,000 boxes of
19 documents in an off-site storage facility, and I
20 reviewed the indice–the indices associated with
21 those boxes to try to find anything associated
22 with the Meadows Plant, Kearny, New Jersey, Mr.
23 Johnsons employer–Im drawing a blank
24 now–Scrimshaw.
25 Q Yes.

27
1 A And I also looked for documents
2 associated specifically using the term Meadows
3 Plant and Seaboard, New Jersey.
4 Q And what was the result of your
5 research?
6 A Well, most of the documents that we
7 have associated with the Meadows Plant actually
8 have to do with former employees, hourly
9 employees personnel files. Thats the vast
10 majority of the–of the documents that we have
11 associated with that plant.
12 There were a limited number of
13 documents associated with a fire that occurred in
14 the early 50s, or mid-50s at the plant. There
15 was an insurance claim associated with that fire.
16 And thats about–thats about all that I found
17 that, you know, that had anything to do with the
18 physical plant itself.
19 Q Were there any documents concerning
20 the corporate history of that particular plant?
21 A I didnt find anything like that,
22 no.
23 Q So the information contained–you
24 dont know the–where the source of the
25 information contained in the Answers to

28
1 Interrogatories concerning the history of the
2 physical plant?
3 A Im sorry. I did–there–I did talk
4 to another in-house counsel in–at Beazer whos
5 managing an environmental claim associated with
6 that plant, and he provided me with some of the
7 background information.
8 Q Whats the person–whats that
9 persons name?
10 A His names is Charles McChesney,
11 M-c-C-h-e-s-n-e-y.
12 Q And whats the nature of the
13 environmental claim arising from that plant?
14 A Its a cleanup.
15 Q What kind of cleanup?
16 A I didnt get into all of that with
17 him. I just asked him about the corporate history
18 and whether–I know that there–there–its I
19 think naphthalene related is what he told me.
20 Its–there–its a rather large cleanup, and I
21 know naphthalene is involved.
22 Q And do you know the–the location of
23 the Meadows Plant in relation to the Koppers Coke
24 Plant located in Kearny, New Jersey?
25 A Yeah. There–they–there was a piece

29
1 of property that was divided into I believe five
2 different segments, and one of them was the coke
3 plant, and adjacent to it was the–was the Meadows
4 Plant.
5 Q And your understanding, does the
6 environmental claim concern the entire property?
7 A Thats my understanding, yes.
8 Q Other than talking to Mr. McCluskey
9 (sic), did you talk to any other person in
10 preparation for todays deposition?
11 A Other than Mr. Dugan.
12 Q Right.
13 Did you speak with any current
14 employees of Beazer East, other than the
15 attorneys?
16 A There are no employees of Beazer
17 East, Inc.
18 Q Did you speak to any prior
19 employees–
20 A No.
21 Q –any former employees?
22 A I was not able to find the names of
23 anyone who knew about the Meadows Plant. And–and
24 when I spoke–his nickname is Chip. When I spoke
25 to Chip McChesney about that, he had not been able

30
1 to locate any employees either, former employees,
2 associated with the Meadows Plant.
3 Q When did Koppers first learn about
4 the dangers of asbestos?
5 A Its hard to put that on with any
6 certainty. There were–from my review of
7 documents and from some of my discussions with
8 former employees, it appears as if there was some
9 information about–associated with our roofing
10 products that started to come out in the 1970s,
11 and there was some concern about roofing
12 associated–Im sorry, hazards associated with
13 asbestos in roofing products.
14 I saw memos and spoke with some
15 former roofing people about the dangers that they
16 knew about. And I spoke with Dr. McGraw, Donald
17 McGraw, who was the corporate medical director.
18 But he didnt–he wasnt hired until 1982. So his
19 information is anecdotal. And again, it seemed to
20 be that it was around–in terms of–in terms of it
21 impacting Koppers, it appeared as if it was in the
22 mid–mid-1970s.
23 Q So your answer, then, is–to the
24 question of when did Koppers first learn about the
25 dangers of asbestos, your answer today is the

31
1 mid-1970s?
2 A Thats when I saw information
3 percolating up in documents and talking to people,
4 yes.
5 Q Im going to show you whats going to
6 be marked as P-2 for identification, and its a
7 deposition–and counsel can look at it with
8 you–its a deposition that took place in 1997.
9 Correct?
10 MR. DUGAN: June 27th, 1997.
11 A Oh, okay.
12 (Off the record.)
13 Q If you look at page 92 of the
14 deposition transcript, you were asked the
15 question, When did Koppers first become aware of
16 the dangers of asbestos?
17 A Uh-huh.
18 Q And your answer was, Its my
19 understanding that that occurred in the early
20 80s, when we started–Koppers Company started
21 getting sued.
22 Do you recall that testimony now?
23 A I do, yes.
24 Q Okay.
25 A Yes.

32
1 Q And your testimony today–
2 A Uh-huh.
3 Q –is that that answer is–is not
4 correct?
5 A Thats right.
6 Q Okay. And that its really in the
7 mid-70s?
8 A Thats right.
9 Q Okay. And that testimony obviously
10 was taken under oath. Correct?
11 A Yes. And at the time, that was my
12 understanding.
13 Q At the time.
14 And that was 1997.
15 A Right.
16 Q And now this is 2008.
17 A 2009.
18 Q 2009. Sorry.
19 And 19–and when you made that
20 answer, when you gave that answer under oath, you
21 had already been affiliated with Beazer East for
22 over 15 years, I would say.
23 A Thats right.
24 Q Okay. And the next thing Im going
25 to show you, which well mark as P-3 for

33
1 identification, is your deposition testimony
2 thats dated March 1st, 2006.
3 A Okay.
4 Q And on page 11 you were asked, When
5 did Koppers first become aware of the dangers of
6 asbestos?
7 Or, in other words, I want to be
8 exact, and it said, What I would kind of like to
9 know is when is the first time that Koppers became
10 aware that asbestos could lead to asbestosis?
11 A Uh-huh.
12 Q And you stated, Its really not
13 clear from the documents that we have, and thats
14 the only way…we have current knowledge right now
15 about the dangers of asbestos because there are no
16 employees of Beazer East, Inc., who were with
17 Koppers Company before 1985. And so the knowledge
18 is based upon documents and based upon some
19 depositions of former employees, and those have
20 been less than clear. So I cant give you an
21 exact date or a year.
22 A Thats right.
23 Q Okay. And that was your testimony
24 under oath a few years ago.
25 A Yes.

34
1 Q And then in the same deposition you
2 were asked, What does the corporation say about
3 asbestos exposure and cancer?
4 And your answer was, I can basically
5 tell you that the first lawsuit we received was in
6 1982.
7 A And thats accurate.
8 Q And that was again your testimony
9 under oath.
10 A Correct.
11 Q Okay. So you testified about 1982,
12 and today you say the mid-1970s.
13 A Well, I think thats a different
14 question.
15 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
16 Mischaracterizes prior testimony.
17 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay. You can just
18 say, Objection to form. Thats fine.
19 Okay.
20 Q So how–can you explain your answer,
21 then?
22 A I think the question here, it was
23 what is the association between asbestos and
24 cancer.
25 Q Okay.

35
1 A And that answer is that we received
2 the first lawsuit in 1982.
3 Q Okay.
4 A That doesnt really, to be honest,
5 answer that question, I guess. But Im telling
6 you today, because Ive done–this–my information
7 has evolved as Ive gotten more in–more
8 doc–reviewed more documents, talked to more
9 people, and my understanding today is that we knew
10 about the dangers of asbestos as early as the
11 19–the mid-1970s.
12 Q Okay. And what did you review that
13 caused you to change your mind after you had given
14 testimony under oath?
15 A I have reviewed–Ive–
16 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
17 THE WITNESS: Sorry.
18 A I reviewed some documents–
19 Q What were the documents that you
20 reviewed?
21 A Okay. There was a document from a
22 person in the roofing division dated I want to say
23 in the mid-1970s that basically said he had some
24 concerns that OSHA and EPA were going to start
25 regulating the use of asbestos in roofing

36
1 products, and that he wrote to someone in the
2 Industrial Health Department, who–and the
3 argument that he was giving was that the asbestos
4 in our roofing products was encapsulated and,
5 therefore, didnt cause a problem.
6 That tells me that that person
7 knew–that someone within the corporation knew in
8 the 1970s that there was at least some belief that
9 there was a problem associated with the use of
10 asbestos.
11 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay. What are we
12 up to now? P-4?
13 MR. DUGAN: Yes.
14 Q Okay. Im going to show you whats
15 been marked–which will be marked as P-4, and its
16 your deposition transcript dated March 10th of
17 2008, which was two years after this last
18 transcript.
19 A Uh-huh.
20 Q And drawing your attention to page
21 128, which is, When did Koppers or Beazer East
22 become aware of the dangers associated with
23 asbestos exposure?
24 And your answer is, Its my
25 understanding from Charles Flickinger that

37
1 generally speaking he became aware of some
2 exposure to asbestos causing a hazard or health
3 hazard as things became available in the general
4 public, in other words, about the time that Dr.
5 Selikoff began publishing articles, particularly
6 those articles that were in the Wall Street
7 Journal. Thats what I recall of Charles
8 Flickingers testimony.
9 Would this have been in the late
10 1960s?
11 Thats my understanding, yes.
12 You made that testimony under oath,
13 maam?
14 A Yes, I did.
15 Q Okay. And so now we have your
16 testimony under oath that you–the company knew
17 about the–the dangers of asbestos in the early
18 80s, the company knew about the dangers of
19 asbestos in the mid-70s, and here we have the
20 company knew about the dangers of asbestos in the
21 late 60s.
22 A Charlie–
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 THE WITNESS: Sorry.
25 A Charlie Flickinger testified, he was

38
1 a former employee, that he began becoming aware of
2 those articles. But that was not something
3 that–he became aware of it just because its a
4 matter of general information, not as being
5 concerned about it associated with Koppers
6 Company.
7 So–and you may–thats a distinction
8 that Charlie, as an individual, became aware
9 because he was interested in the industrial–he
10 was an industrial hygienist, and that he became
11 aware of some information that was out in the
12 general public.
13 But that doesnt–that doesnt
14 associate–I mean, there was no indication from
15 him that he took that information and used it in a
16 capacity in his employment as–as an industrial
17 hygienist for Koppers Company.
18 Q So youre saying that–that the fact
19 that Koppers industrial hygienist had knowledge
20 is–is not putting the company on notice?
21 A Im saying that my recollection of
22 Charlies testimony was that he became generally
23 aware through, again, public media that there was
24 an association between asbestos and health
25 hazards, but he also testified that there were no

39
1 Koppers Company employees who had any kind of
2 asbestos issues.
3 Koppers didnt think of itself as an
4 asbestos company. And so it didnt–he didnt act
5 on that information in his official capacity as an
6 industrial hygienist. So Im saying that as a
7 private citizen, he said he found this kind of
8 information out.
9 Q So its your testimony here today
10 that the fact that Charles Flickinger knew about
11 the dangers of asbestos in the late 60s has
12 nothing to–and hes an industrial hygienist, has
13 nothing to do with your companys knowledge.
14 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
15 Q Just yes or no, maam.
16 A Well, its not as easy as that, I
17 dont think.
18 I think that he–he viewed it as not
19 information that he was using in his official
20 capacity as an industrial hygienist
21 because–again, this is my recollection of his
22 testimony and from having talked to him–that
23 Koppers Company was not an asbestos-manufacturing
24 company.
25 Q What do you have to do to be an

40
1 asbestos-manufacturing company, maam?
2 A Manufacturing asbestos-containing
3 products. And at that time Koppers Company
4 roofing division had just begun to, in–in the
5 19–late 1960s, had just begun to manufacture
6 asbestos-containing products.
7 Q So you say, its your testimony here
8 today, that Koppers began manufacturing
9 asbestos-containing roofing products in the late
10 1960s?
11 A Uh-huh.
12 Q Okay. Lets move on.
13 Do you believe that Koppers has
14 historically been concerned with safety–the
15 safety of its employees and consumers?
16 A Is it my opinion?
17 Q Yes.
18 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
19 Q Do you believe, as a corp–as a
20 rep–as a corporate representative, that Koppers
21 has historically been concerned with safety of its
22 employees and consumers?
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 A My understanding was that I was–
25 Q Thats really a yes or no, maam.

41
1 A –to be here as a fact witness, not
2 to give opinions.
3 Q Well, as a corporate representative,
4 do you believe that Koppers was concerned about
5 safety?
6 A Yes, I do.
7 Q Okay. And then this will be marked
8 as P-5, and this has been furnished to me in
9 discovery.
10 Have you seen it before, maam?
11 A Oh, yes.
12 Q Okay. And thats the Safety Plan of
13 Koppers. Correct?
14 A Right. Yes.
15 Q So its your testimony that you
16 believe that Koppers was concerned about safety.
17 You had already reviewed and knew
18 that Koppers had a Safety Plan in existence, and
19 it was revised in 1954. Correct?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Okay. I direct your attention to
22 page 3, Koppers Company, Inc., and its Safety Plan
23 has a number of policies, and one is to Use
24 nationally accepted safety practices and standards
25 where practical.

42
1 Do you see that?
2 A Yes, I do.
3 Q And its your contention, based upon
4 the documents that you reviewed, the 27,000 boxes
5 that are currently in existence regarding the
6 history of Koppers Company, is it your contention
7 that Koppers did use nationally accepted safety
8 practices and standards where practical?
9 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
10 A I believe that they tried to the best
11 of their abilities, yes.
12 Q Okay. And just to be clear, from now
13 on when I refer to Koppers, Im being synonymous
14 with Beazer East–
15 A Oh, yes.
16 Q –and Im going to be using those
17 names interchangeably.
18 A Understood, yes.
19 Q I show you whats been marked–whats
20 up on the screen as P-6.
21 MS. PLACITELLA: And, Counsel, you
22 can look at that.
23 Q Thats the Safety Regulation No.
24 3…Threshold Limit Values for Dusts, Vapors,
25 Fumes, Gases and Mists, effective October of

43
1 1958.
2 Have you seen that before, maam?
3 A No, I have not.
4 Q Okay. Are you aware that the State
5 of New Jersey had state–state regulations
6 regarding the TLVs, or threshold limit values, for
7 dusts, vapors and fumes–
8 A No.
9 Q –as early as 1958?
10 A No, I was not aware of that.
11 Q And you–and youre aware, of course,
12 that–that Koppers had a facility located in New
13 Jersey.
14 A Yes, Im aware of that.
15 Q Okay. In all of the documents that
16 you have reviewed, did you see any documentation
17 that Koppers followed the regulation of the
18 threshold limit values for dusts, vapors, fumes,
19 gases and mists?
20 A I have not seen any documents either
21 way.
22 Q When was–when did Koppers first use
23 asbestos?
24 A I would believe that Koppers first
25 used asbestos as early as 1944, when it was

44
1 incorporated.
2 Q Okay. Now, I draw your attention to
3 your transcript, deposition transcript on May–on
4 March 1st, 2006, where you did say that it started
5 in 1944, asbestos first used by Koppers, and the
6 engineering and construction division was sold in
7 1984. Correct?
8 A Thats correct.
9 Q And in 1944, coke ovens and other
10 steelmaking equipment that Koppers designed and
11 constructed used asbestos. Correct?
12 A Thats correct.
13 Q Okay. And its your testimony that
14 the first–the first time that roofing products
15 were used–no–the first time Koppers sold
16 asbestos-containing roofing products was the late
17 60s. Correct?
18 A The–the roofing division–oh, whats
19 the word I want–they saturated asbestos felt as
20 early as 1964, and then they purchased the
21 division of Lubrizol in 1967, I believe, that
22 made–that actually manufactured
23 asbestos-containing roofing cement.
24 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay. What is
25 this? P-7?

45
1 THE REPORTER: Yes.
2 Q I show you whats been marked as
3 P-7.
4 How do you explain this now, which is
5 Sweets Catalog from 1959 that speaks–talks about
6 Koppers asbestos-containing saturated felt for
7 roofing products?
8 MR. DUGAN: Lets go off the record
9 for a minute so we have a chance to review
10 it.
11 MS. PLACITELLA: Sure.
12 Want to take a five-minute break?
13 MR. DUGAN: That would be good.
14 MS. PLACITELLA: Oh, wait a second.
15 Wait. Excuse me.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes.
17 MS. PLACITELLA: Thats okay. Take a
18 break.
19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the video
20 record at 11:52.
21 (A short recess was taken.)
22 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Back on the video
23 record at 11:54.
24 BY MS. PLACITELLA:
25 Q So, maam, is–is it correct, then,

46
1 that before today you have testified that the
2 first time that Koppers sold asbestos-containing
3 roofing products was 1964? Correct?
4 A Yes, it is.
5 Q Right. And you were not aware that
6 Koppers had sold asbestos-containing roofing
7 products as early as 1959?
8 A I have to tell you that thats a
9 surprise to me.
10 Q Okay. Well, dont you wish that
11 somebody from the company would have told you?
12 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
13 You dont have to answer that one.
14 Q And youve been with the company for
15 24 years. Correct?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Youve been in asbestos litigation
18 for 20 years. Correct?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And youve testified that
21 asbestos-containing roofing products first were
22 sold by Koppers in the mid-1960s on numerous
23 occasions. Correct?
24 A I have, indeed.
25 Q And regarding the–the

47
1 asbestos-containing roofing products, youve
2 testified that at some point that warning labels
3 were put on those products. Correct?
4 A There was a warning label placed in
5 the Sweets manual, similar–a similar document to
6 this, in 1981, associated with the–an insulation
7 product. There was an insulation product that was
8 made either by–with iso–isocyanurics or with
9 phenolic foam, and I believe it was the phenolic
10 foam insulation that for a period of time, from
11 1980 to 1981, had a Johns-Manville manufactured
12 facer on it, and that there was a warning label in
13 the Sweets manual associated with that asbestos,
14 with that asbestos base–base flashing, or facer,
15 sorry.
16 Q And according to your testimony of
17 today, Koppers became aware of the dangers of
18 asbestos in the mid-1970s and the first warnings
19 were not put on until early 1980s. Correct?
20 A That was because the–
21 Q Thats a yes or no answer.
22 A No, maam, its not, because the
23 roofing products were exempted from the need for
24 warning labels by both OSHA and EPA.
25 Q So OSHA and EPA were followed from

48
1 what time? From 1970?
2 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
3 A Whenever they came into existence.
4 Q P-8, Im going to be referring to
5 your Answers to Interrogatories, which will be
6 marked as P-8 for identification.
7 A Okay.
8 Q Im drawing your attention to answer
9 number 8, which the question pertains to, Has this
10 defendant ever been affiliated or a member of, and
11 it lists a whole number of organizations.
12 A Uh-huh.
13 Q Let me just back up.
14 And on–on–on this P-8, the last
15 form is your Certification. Correct?
16 A Correct.
17 Q And its dated November 5th,
18 19–2009.
19 A Thats correct.
20 Q Okay. And you certified that you
21 read the foregoing answers of Defendant Beazer
22 East, Inc. to Plaintiffs Supplemental
23 Interrogatories, that the foregoing statements
24 made by you are true and youre authorized to make
25 the certification on behalf of Beazer East, the

49
1 information contained therein is not wholly within
2 your personal knowledge, and so forth.
3 Its my understanding that based
4 upon–well, strike that.
5 Do you prepare the answers to every
6 single answer to interrogatory that you sign and
7 certify?
8 A I dont prepare them. I work with
9 counsel to prepare them.
10 Q So counsel prepares them, or you
11 assist them, and then you review the final draft–
12 A Yes.
13 Q –and sign it?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And thats been consistently what
16 youve testified to throughout your nine
17 depositions. Correct?
18 A Yes.
19 Q So, regarding your answer to number
20 8, you had indicated that one organization, the
21 Industrial Hygiene Foundation, that–that Beazer
22 East has been a member, but you are no–you have
23 no information regarding the length or years of
24 membership or representation in said organization;
25 is that correct?

50
1 A Thats correct.
2 Q Okay. Now, lets go over that.
3 Back in 1997, you were asked, Are
4 you aware if Koppers was a member of the
5 Industrial Hygiene Foundation?
6 And you said, I dont know that.
7 A Correct.
8 Q Thats your correct testimony back in
9 1997. Correct?
10 A Yes.
11 Q So that was after you were affiliated
12 with Beazer East for about 15 years, you didnt
13 know whether or not they were a member of the
14 Industrial Hygiene Foundation.
15 A Thats right.
16 Q Okay. And then since that time, is
17 it fair to say that you found out that they were a
18 member of the organization, but you dont have any
19 information as to length of years? Is that true?
20 A What I–what happened since that
21 deposition was taken was that I found a 1953
22 listing of organizations to which Koppers was a
23 member. Thats the only document that I have
24 found that tells me who was a member in 1953.
25 I have not gone to the organizations

51
1 like the National–or, Im sorry, the Industrial
2 Hygiene Foundation, to their records. I only know
3 based on what Koppers records are. And Koppers
4 records are the 1953 listing.
5 Q Well, why didnt you go to the
6 Industrial Hygiene Foundation to find out what
7 their records were, maam?
8 A Because I cant authenticate those
9 records.
10 Q Well, wouldnt you like to know the
11 extent of your companys involvement in the
12 Industrial Hygiene Foundation?
13 MR. DUGAN: Objection what she
14 wants.
15 A Im–I am testifying, and asked to
16 testify, as a representative of Koppers Company,
17 and so I do that based upon the information that
18 our company has.
19 Q Right. And so in–in your research
20 to find out what the extent of your companys
21 involvement in Industrial Hygiene Foundation, did
22 you have an occasion to review any
23 documents–documents in the library that Koppers
24 has?
25 A No, because the library was torn down

52
1 in 1988.
2 Q Were any of the documents that were
3 in the library saved?
4 A No. They were–they were–in 1988,
5 when the chemical divisions were sold off between
6 1988 and 1989, what happened was all of the
7 documents in the Monroeville Research Library went
8 with those companies that purchased those chemical
9 divisions, because they were deemed as being
10 related to the ongoing businesses that those
11 companies were purchasing, and so none of those
12 records were kept by Beazer East, Inc. They were
13 part of the assets that were sold to these various
14 other companies.
15 Q And that was in 1988.
16 A Yes.
17 Q And your first lawsuit that Koppers
18 had was in 1982. Correct?
19 A Asbestos lawsuit.
20 Q Correct.
21 A Yes.
22 Q So in 19–from 1982 to 1988, for
23 those six years, there was no effort made to
24 research in the library what documents there were
25 concerning the companys historical knowledge of

53
1 the dangers of asbestos?
2 A I was not involved with asbestos
3 litigation from 1982 to 1988, and so I dont know
4 what was done.
5 Q Okay.
6 A I just know what I did from 1988
7 forward.
8 Q Okay. Well, Im going to–is
9 this–are we up to P-9? Okay.
10 Im going to show you whats–which
11 will be marked as P-9 for identification, and this
12 is the–the Koppers 1953 list of memberships and
13 representations.
14 Have you had a chance to review that
15 as part of your–the discovery that I had received
16 from counsel?
17 A Thats right.
18 Q Okay. And do you agree–do you agree
19 with me that this is about 30 page–no. Im
20 sorry. Yeah, its about 30 pages of different
21 organizations that–and different
22 society–organizations, societies that Koppers was
23 a member of in the year 1953?
24 A Thats correct.
25 Q Quite extensive.

54
1 Would you agree with me?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Im going to show you, which will be
4 P-10 for identification, and its the Industrial
5 Hygiene Digest 1975.
6 A This–this says Annual Report.
7 Is that the same thing?
8 Q Yes, Annual Report.
9 And it indicates, if you can see
10 the–the page with the highlight–can I have that
11 back? I just want to have my notes. Thank you.
12 It indicates–well, if you can, can I
13 have it back for one moment?
14 A Sure.
15 Q Let me show you.
16 Page 7 indicates that Koppers
17 Company, Inc. has been a member of the Industrial
18 Hygiene Foundation since 1942.
19 A Okay.
20 Q Do you see that, maam?
21 A I do see that.
22 Q Did you know that before today?
23 A To be honest with you, I was shown a
24 document similar to this in a recent deposition,
25 but I dont know if it had this date. It did have

55
1 older dates than the 1953 listed that I have.
2 Q Okay. So its your testimony that
3 you did not know before today that Koppers Company
4 had been a member of the Industrial Hygiene
5 Foundation since 1942?
6 A I didnt–
7 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
8 A I didnt recall that, no.
9 Q Okay. So now that this has been
10 established. Correct?
11 A Thats what the document says,
12 correct.
13 Q Okay. And, for the record, youre
14 familiar with the Industrial Hygiene Foundation.
15 Correct?
16 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
17 A Slightly, yes.
18 Q Okay. And you–youre an attorney
19 involved in asbestos litigation. Youre aware of
20 the organization.
21 Is that fair to say?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Would you agree with me that a quick
24 summary of Industrial Hygiene Foundation is that
25 its purpose was to achieve good environmental

56
1 conditions for workers–
2 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
3 Q –employees?
4 A I dont know that. I–I–I dont
5 know what their mission or purpose was to that
6 level of detail.
7 Q Okay.
8 A I just am vaguely aware of the
9 organization.
10 Q Do you know where the Industrial
11 Hygiene Foundation was headquartered?
12 A I want to say that they were
13 headquartered at Carnegie-Mellon University in
14 Pittsburg, but Im not quite sure of that.
15 Q Okay. Youre correct.
16 You obviously have reviewed Dr.–Mr.
17 Flickingers testimony?
18 A Not lately, no.
19 Q Oh, you havent?
20 A Not lately, no.
21 Q Okay. Well, he testified in June of
22 19–June 11th of 1998, and Ill have his–Ill
23 have his transcript marked P-11, and he
24 testified–the question was, Do you know where
25 the Industrial Hygiene Foundation was centered or

57
1 headquartered? Was it at the Mellon Institute?
2 And his answer was, Yes.
3 And the next question was, And it
4 was at the Mellon Institute at the same time that
5 Koppers had part of their research laboratory at
6 the Mellon Institute, is that correct?
7 And the answer was, I assume so.
8 A I see that.
9 Q Are you familiar with his testimony?
10 A I havent reviewed Charlies
11 testimony in a long time.
12 Q But you have reviewed it. Correct?
13 A At different points, yes.
14 Q Okay. Because you indicated in the
15 beginning that was the reason–in the beginning of
16 your testimony today that was the reason why you
17 had at one deposition said that Koppers became
18 aware of the dangers of asbestos in the sum–in
19 the late 60s because of what Mr. Flickinger had
20 said in his testimony.
21 Am I–am I paraphrasing your
22 testimony today accurately?
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 A Yes, I think so. But it wasnt just
25 on his testimony. It was also in discussions with

58
1 him.
2 Q Correct. Okay.
3 A Just so thats a clarification.
4 Q Thats fair.
5 Were you aware before you reviewed
6 Mr. Flickingers testimony that the Koppers
7 Company had a relationship with the Mellon
8 Institute?
9 A I knew that there was a relationship
10 with Mellon Institute, yes.
11 Q And going back to Mr. Flickingers
12 employment, he was an industrial hygienist at
13 Koppers Company. Correct?
14 A Correct.
15 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
16 Q And he–
17 MS. PLACITELLA: Whats the
18 objection?
19 MR. DUGAN: My objection is thats
20 not entirely accurate.
21 MS. PLACITELLA: Well, Im going to
22 go through his–his work history.
23 Q And he began employment at Koppers in
24 1948–
25 A I–

59
1 Q –is that correct?
2 A I honestly havent memorized
3 Charlies–
4 Q Okay. Well, he was there in the
5 1940s. He started in the 1940s.
6 Do–do you agree with that?
7 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
8 A If you can–I honestly have not
9 memorized Charlies employment history. I know
10 that he was a longtime employee. I just dont
11 know his starting date.
12 Q Well, why dont we, just for the
13 record, can you give me that testimony–that
14 transcript back, and well review as to when he
15 first started.
16 A Okay.
17 Q Im going to draw your attention to
18 line 9 on page 12.
19 A Okay.
20 Q And it says, Now, from the
21 deposition that you gave in the summer of 1997,
22 you began at Koppers in 1948, is that correct?
23 And the answer was, Correct.
24 A Okay.
25 Q So now weve refreshed both our

60
1 recollections.
2 A There you go.
3 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
4 MS. PLACITELLA: Do you mind if we
5 take a 10-minute break?
6 THE WITNESS: Not at all.
7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the video
8 record at 12:11.
9 (A short recess was taken.)
10 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Back on the video
11 record at 12:22.
12 BY MS. PLACITELLA:
13 Q Mrs. Wright, were you aware that
14 Koppers and Mellon Institute worked together in
15 research as early as 1942?
16 A I know that Koppers was involved with
17 research at Mellon Institute very early on in its
18 corporate history. I cant tell you if it was
19 since 1942.
20 Q I show you what will be marked as
21 P-12 for identification. And as you can see, its
22 a prelim–preliminary report on Koppers animal
23 exposure study that was prepared.
24 A Uh-huh.
25 Q Did I read that correctly?

61
1 A Thats what it says, yes.
2 Q And are you familiar that–that
3 Koppers and the Mellon Institute performed
4 toxicidity (sic) studies of products whereby
5 animals were tested to determine certain levels of
6 toxicidity? Is that correct?
7 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
8 MS. PLACITELLA: Or strike that.
9 Q Are you aware that the Mellon
10 Institute worked in conjunction with Kop–with
11 Koppers testing the toxicidity level of certain
12 products?
13 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
14 MS. PLACITELLA: Whats the nature of
15 the objection?
16 MR. DUGAN: Assuming facts not in
17 evidence, speculative.
18 MS. PLACITELLA: Im asking a
19 question if shes aware of it.
20 A Im aware that there were toxicity
21 studies done in conjunction with the Mellon
22 Institute.
23 Q Okay. And you–did I–did I
24 paraphrase that correctly, that the toxicidity
25 part of the study regarding the toxicidity

62
1 involved testing on animals?
2 A I didnt know that part.
3 Q You didnt know that. Okay.
4 Are you aware that Mr. Johnson, the
5 plaintiff in this matter, has testified that he
6 believes he was exposed to asbestos when he worked
7 at a Koppers building?
8 A I believe he testified–well, I was
9 told he testified that he was exposed to
10 asbestos–he believed he was exposed to asbestos
11 at the Koppers mothball manufacturing facility,
12 the Meadows Plant.
13 Q And thats correct. That was his
14 testimony.
15 And are you aware that his testimony,
16 based upon his review of his Social Security
17 records and his recollection of who the general
18 contractor was, that he thinks that it was in the
19 latter part of the 1950s, around 1956 or
20 thereafter, that he worked at the Koppers
21 facility?
22 A Thats my–
23 Q Were you aware of that?
24 A I was aware of that, yes.
25 Q Okay. So were you aware that the

63
1 year before Mr. Johnson worked at the Koppers
2 facility, in 1955, that Koppers was put on notice
3 of the dangers of asbestos?
4 A No.
5 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
6 Q This is, which it will be, I think,
7 P-12.
8 MR. DUGAN: 13.
9 MS. PLACITELLA: 13.
10 Q This is a copy of the Industrial
11 Hygiene Digest for 1955.
12 A Okay.
13 Q And I show you its October 1955.
14 A Okay.
15 Q And you can see they had a conference
16 program, which was the 10th Annual Meeting of
17 Industrial Hygiene Foundation, the Mellon
18 Institute, and they had a Chemical-Toxicological
19 Conference in November of 1955. The chairman was
20 this Dr.–and how do you pronounce her name?
21 Are you familiar with her?
22 A Dr. Anna Baetjer.
23 Q Baetjer.
24 And who was Miss Baetjer–Dr.
25 Baetjer?

64
1 A My understanding was that she was an
2 industrial hygienist with Johns Hopkins
3 University.
4 Q And she had–she was a consulting
5 toxicologist for Koppers. Correct?
6 A At different points in time, yes.
7 Q And you can see that she was a–the
8 chair–we should say chairwoman, Dr. Baetjer–
9 A Chairperson.
10 Q –of this conference. Correct?
11 A Chairperson, yes.
12 Q Chairperson. Okay.
13 And were you aware that Fred
14 Dansig–Dan–Danig–
15 A Fred Denig.
16 Q Denig?
17 A Yes.
18 Q –vice president of Koppers, was
19 a–presented a management view at this 1955
20 conference?
21 A I–until you showed it to me, I was
22 not aware of that 1955 conference.
23 Q Okay. So you were not aware that the
24 vice president of Koppers was present at a
25 conference in which your consulting toxicologist

65
1 was chairwoman.
2 A Right.
3 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
4 Q And you can see, based upon the
5 blowup on the board and also here, that it was a
6 research develop–research development on
7 prevention of occupation disease conference, and I
8 believe that Mr. Danig (sic) was vice president at
9 that time of Koppers; is that correct?
10 A Thats my understanding, yes.
11 Q And in addition, at this–this–in
12 this digest, October of 1955, there was an article
13 specifically related to asbestos which indicates
14 pulmonary disability for asbestos work.
15 Do you see that, maam?
16 A I see that, yes. Its related to
17 asbestos workers, right.
18 Q So this is the year before Mr.
19 Johnson worked at Koppers that your vice president
20 was involved with the Industrial Hygiene
21 Foundation.
22 Do you see that, maam?
23 A I see that he was involved, yes.
24 Q I show you what will be marked P-14,
25 which is Industrial Hygienist Digest for February

66
1 of 1956.
2 A This is a literature ab–abstract.
3 Q Literature abstract. Thats
4 correct.
5 A Okay.
6 Q And if you look on page 2, it
7 indicates that Dr. Webb returns to Mellon
8 Institute from the post of manager, planning
9 section, chemical divisions of Koppers Company.
10 Did I read that correctly?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Did you–did you know Dr. Webb?
13 A Not at all.
14 Q Did you ever read–read about him in
15 your research?
16 A No, I havent.
17 Q Well, apparently he formerly served
18 on a fellowship at the Mellon Institute and–and
19 also had worked at Koppers Company.
20 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
21 Thats what the document says.
22 MS. PLACITELLA: I understand that,
23 Counsel.
24 Q And if you look at the highlighted
25 section, it also indicates that there were two

67
1 art–articles in this literature abstract that
2 pertain to asbestos.
3 You can see one is Carcinoma of
4 the Lung in Asbestosis: Report of two
5 Additional Cases, and Asbestosis and Pulmonary
6 Carcinoma is in as–in an Asbestos Spinner.
7 Notes on the Induction of Lung Cancer by Asbestos
8 Fibers.
9 Do you see that, maam?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Okay. And this is the year that Mr.
12 Johnson was–contends that he was exposed to
13 asbestos at a Koppers facility.
14 A Right. But Mr. Johnson wasnt an
15 asbestos spinner, as I understand it.
16 Q I understand. But Im–Im showing
17 you, obviously, that Koppers was put on notice
18 regarding the hazards of asbestos with the
19 involvement of Dr. Webb and also vice–Mr. Danig.
20 Did I say his name correctly?
21 A Denig.
22 Q Denig.
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection. Move to
24 strike.
25 Q Now we move up to 1961, which I will

68
1 find, is P-15, and it is minutes of an annual
2 membership meeting in October 1961, and you can
3 see that Dr. Paul Bachman was elected to
4 membership of the board of trustees.
5 Did you know Mr. Bachman?
6 A No.
7 Q He was vice president of Koppers.
8 Did you know that?
9 A No.
10 Q He was on the board of trustees of
11 the Industrial Hygiene Foundation 1961.
12 A Okay.
13 Q Now we go back to 1975, which has
14 already been identified as P-10 for
15 identification–
16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Was that P-10?
17 MS. PLACITELLA: P-10, yeah.
18 Q –P-10 for identification, and you
19 can see a–if you look at the highlighted sections
20 of this document that Dr. William Maclay, Koppers
21 Company, was on the board of directors, and Mrs.
22 Jean Klara, a nurse, was on the nursing committee
23 from Koppers Co. on the Indus–Industrial Hygiene
24 Foundation.
25 Were you aware of that?

69
1 A From Koppers Coke?
2 Q Koppers–Koppers Company.
3 A Im sorry. Okay.
4 Q Were you aware of that, maam?
5 A No.
6 Q Okay. And in 1975, in the Annual
7 Report, theres also included an article
8 concerning Asbestos Fiber Counting. And you can
9 see the tag that shows you to that location.
10 Were you aware of that, maam?
11 MR. DUGAN: Whats the question?
12 Was she aware that thats in the
13 article?
14 MS. PLACITELLA: That thats included
15 in the 1975 Annual Report.
16 MR. DUGAN: Was she aware that it was
17 in there prior to seeing it right now? Is
18 that–
19 MS. PLACITELLA: Yeah. That was the
20 question.
21 A No.
22 Q And if you look at the last tagged
23 section of that report, it indicates that in 1975
24 Koppers supported a trustees fund in the amount of
25 $5,000. And this is for the Industrial Hygiene

70
1 Foundation.
2 A I see that.
3 Q Were you aware of that before today,
4 maam?
5 A No.
6 Q P-16 for identification, Im going to
7 show you a document from the American–Im sorry,
8 from the Industrial Hygiene Foundation dated
9 December 21st of 1977. And you can see as late as
10 1977 Koppers still had a–an employee on the board
11 of trustees, and that was Dr. Alonzo W. Lawrence.
12 He was vice president of Environmental Resources.
13 Were you aware of that, maam, before
14 today?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Oh, you were aware of that.
17 A Yes.
18 Q Okay. So you were aware that in 1977
19 Koppers had an emp–had an employee on the board
20 of trustees.
21 A Yes.
22 Q But were you aware that Koppers had
23 a–a board–Koppers had an employee on the board
24 of trustees as early as 1961, as I showed you
25 previously?

71
1 A No. I–I knew Dr. Lawrence. Thats
2 why I know that.
3 Q Are you aware, maam, that–that
4 Koppers industrial hygienist has testified that
5 he believes that Koppers had the Industrial
6 Hygiene Foundation documents available to the
7 company during the 1940s?
8 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
9 Who are you referring to?
10 MS. PLACITELLA: The Koppers
11 industrial hygienist, which is Mr.
12 Flickinger, who we spoke about before.
13 Q Were you aware of that?
14 A Again, I havent read Charlies
15 deposition lately. So at some point I probably
16 was aware, since I have read his transcript, but
17 not lately.
18 Q Im going to show you his testimony,
19 and you can review it, because you have the
20 transcript, on page 72, and the question was, So
21 as a company, Koppers would have had available to
22 it, while they were a member of the Industrial
23 Hygiene Foundation, the information on the hazards
24 of asbestos that were published in the abstract
25 in the 1940s. Correct?

72
1 And his answer was, I…assume so.
2 A He assumed so, yes.
3 Q Right.
4 Were you aware of that testimony,
5 maam?
6 A As I said, I havent reviewed
7 Charlies testimony lately. Im sure I was aware
8 of it at some point.
9 Q Were you aware that Koppers was a
10 member of the National Safety Council?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And were you aware that Koppers was a
13 member of the National Safety Council in 1953?
14 A I believe its on the 53 list, yes.
15 Q Were you aware that in 1953 the
16 National Safety Council publicized the Asbestos
17 Textile Industry (sic) Hygiene Committee Meeting,
18 and in those meeting minutes Saranacs research on
19 asbestosis was discussed, as set forth in that–on
20 the screen?
21 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
22 A No, I wasnt–we werent involved in
23 the textile industries.
24 Q But you were a member of the National
25 Safety Council. Correct?

73
1 A Thats correct.
2 Q Were you aware that the National
3 Safety Council in 1955 published an Accident
4 Prevention Manual where TLV was discussed?
5 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
6 A It says for Pure Silica.
7 Q No. It says Asbestos TLV. And if
8 you–if you want to review the document.
9 A Im–Im sorry. Im looking at what
10 you have up there.
11 Q Right.
12 A It says, A maximum dust
13 concentration of 5 million particles per cubic
14 foot has been suggested, precisely as–oh,
15 precisely as for pure free silica.
16 Im sorry. I misread that.
17 Q Okay.
18 A No, I wasnt aware of that.
19 Q And this was the year before Mr.
20 Johnson was exposed to asbestos at the Koppers
21 facility.
22 Were you aware of that, maam?
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 A No. Im–I–Im sorry. I wasnt
25 aware of that, no.

74
1 Q Were you aware that Koppers was a
2 member of American Ceramic Society as early as
3 1933?
4 A I know that they were a member of the
5 American Ceramic Society. Im not sure that I
6 know the beginning date. But Ill take your word
7 for that.
8 Q Okay. Because you can see up on the
9 screen that Mr. Flickingers in his deposition in
10 1998 was shown documents and admitted that Koppers
11 was a corporate member–it was actually Koppers
12 Research Corporation was a corporate member of the
13 American Ceramic Society as early as 1933.
14 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
15 Q I show you what will be marked as
16 P-17, and that is a document that indicates the
17 companies that were members of the American
18 Ceramic Society. It was a membership roster in
19 1946.
20 Can you see the highlighted section
21 where Koppers Company is listed?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Were you aware that Koppers continued
24 to be a member of the American Ceramic Society in
25 1946?

75
1 A As I said, I know Koppers was a
2 member of the American Ceramic Society. I didnt
3 memorize the dates of their membership.
4 Q Are you aware that the American
5 Ceramic Society has published numerous articles
6 about the dangers of asbestos?
7 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
8 A I dont think I knew that, no.
9 Q Are you aware that American–that
10 Koppers was a member of the American Petroleum
11 Institute?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And they were a member in 1963–1953
14 and thereafter, as contained in your
15 documentation.
16 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
17 A I know that they were a member in
18 1953.
19 Q Are you also aware that the American
20 Petroleum Institute publicized numerous articles
21 about the dangers of asbestos?
22 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
23 A Im not aware of that.
24 Q Are you aware that Mr. Flickinger, a
25 Koppers industrial hygienist, has testified that

76
1 he joined the American Council on Governmental
2 Industrial Hygienists within a short time of
3 starting–the start of his employment at Koppers?
4 A My understanding was that he became a
5 member of that when he became an industrial
6 hygienist in 1960. But again, I havent reviewed
7 his testimony lately.
8 Q Well, why dont we review testimony
9 which is on page 39, and it starts up When you
10 began at Koppers…
11 A Okay.
12 (The witness complies with the
13 request.)
14 A American Chemical Engineering Group,
15 American Chemical Engineering Association.
16 Are you saying that the ACGIH is what
17 the industrial–the industrial hygienists–
18 Q Yes.
19 A Thats what that stands for?
20 Q Yes.
21 A Okay.
22 Q Okay. So now do you agree with me
23 that it was his testimony that he became a member
24 shortly after he–a member of the American Council
25 on Governmental Industrial Hygienists shortly

77
1 after he joined Koppers?
2 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
3 A Thats what he testified to.
4 Q Right.
5 Youre familiar with the
6 Johns-Manville Company. Correct?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And its my understanding from
9 reviewing transcripts, I believe from you–your
10 transcripts or Mr. Flickingers transcript, that
11 Johns-Manville was at some point a supplier of
12 asbestos to the facility for use in
13 asbestos-containing products that Koppers
14 manufactured; is that correct?
15 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
16 A Yes.
17 MR. DUGAN: What facility are you
18 talking about?
19 MS. PLACITELLA: Koppers Company
20 generally. Im not speak–Im not limiting
21 it to Kearny, New Jersey.
22 MR. DUGAN: Objection to the form.
23 A They–my understanding is that they
24 supplied asbestos-containing roofing felts that we
25 saturated, and also that they contain–they

78
1 supplied asbestos to the Wickliffe facility in
2 Ohio that manufactured asbestos roofing cement.
3 Q I just have to–for the record, there
4 was an objection. I just have to rephrase the
5 question again.
6 A Sure.
7 Q Can you explain to me whether or not
8 Johns-Man–Johns-Manville Company supplied
9 asbestos to the Koppers Company?
10 A Yes. Its my understanding that they
11 supplied roofing felts to the roofing division
12 that were saturated, and then that they also
13 supplied asbestos to the plant in Wickliffe, Ohio,
14 that manufactured asbestos-containing roofing
15 cement.
16 MS. PLACITELLA: P-18?
17 Q I show you which will be marked as
18 P-18, and it is an internal correspondence from
19 the Johns-Manville Company dated December 7th of
20 1973.
21 A Okay.
22 Q Were you aware that Johns-Manville
23 had invited Koppers to presentations on the issue
24 of asbestos and health in 1973-1974?
25 A It says that Charlie Flickinger

79
1 attended. It appears that way, yes.
2 Q Were you aware of that before today,
3 maam?
4 A I dont believe so.
5 Q I had highlighted is it the–
6 A Thiem.
7 Q Thiem Corporation.
8 A Yes.
9 Q And I know that Koppers had some kind
10 of corporate relationship with that company.
11 A Uh-huh.
12 Q What was the status of the corporate
13 relationship with Thiem Corporation in 1973?
14 A None.
15 Q Okay. So, basically, Im drawing
16 your attention to the fact that Mr. Flickinger,
17 your industrial hygienist, had testified–had
18 appeared at presentations given by Johns-Manville
19 on the issue of asbestos and health.
20 Are you aware of that?
21 A It appears that he attended with Fred
22 Covelli, C-o-v-e-l-l-i, who was the plant
23 engineer. And thats from that facility that I
24 mentioned in Wickliffe, Ohio.
25 Q Im now going to go back to P-8,

80
1 which is the–your–your Answers to
2 Interrogatories.
3 A Okay.
4 MS. PLACITELLA: Do you have a copy?
5 MR. DUGAN: I do.
6 MS. PLACITELLA: Great.
7 Q If you can turn to page 7, which
8 indicates the answer of when this defendant first
9 became aware of potential hazards to human health
10 posed by asbestos or asbestos-containing
11 products.
12 And I believe that your answer is
13 that it was first learned in the mid to early
14 1970s that certain levels of exposure to asbestos
15 in certain workers could cause disease.
16 Did I read that correctly?
17 A Yes.
18 MR. DUGAN: Actually, it says early
19 to mid-1970s. I think you said mid to
20 early.
21 MS. PLACITELLA: Oh, Im sorry. Let
22 me read that again.
23 Q …it was first learned in the early
24 to mid-1970s that certain levels of exposure to
25 asbestos in certain workers could cause disease.

81
1 A Yes.
2 Q Now I read that correctly.
3 A Yes.
4 MR. DUGAN: Yes.
5 Q Now–and is that consistent with your
6 testimony of today?
7 A I believe so.
8 Q Okay. So now lets just go back.
9 And you certified these answers as
10 being correct.
11 A Yes.
12 Q We have discussed previously that in
13 your 1997 deposition you had said that Koppers
14 first became aware of the dangers of asbestos in
15 the early 1980s.
16 My question is, if you can recall,
17 how many Answers to Interrogatories that you had
18 certified that indicated that particular fact,
19 being that Koppers became knowledgeable about the
20 dangers of asbestos in the early 1980s?
21 A I cant quantify that for you. Im
22 sorry.
23 Q Well, if there was 134,000 (sic)
24 asbestos lawsuits, is it fair to say that there
25 were a number where you had certified that

82
1 knowledge began in the 1980s?
2 A I really cant–
3 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
4 A –speculate to that. I really cant.
5 Q Okay. Well, let me ask it this way:
6 Is it fair to say that since you testified that
7 Koppers first became aware of the dangers of
8 asbestos in the early 1980s, in the year 1997, in
9 the year 2006, that there were a significant
10 number of Answers to Interrogatories that
11 reflected that testimony?
12 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
13 A There were Answers to
14 Interrogatories. As I said, I honestly dont
15 know–I dont keep track of how many answers
16 Ive–Ive certified.
17 Q Now, the–Mr. Flickinger, who was the
18 industrial hygienist for Koppers, had testified in
19 1998 regarding asbestos in an asbestos lawsuit.
20 A Uh-huh.
21 Q Now, you reviewed his testimony,
22 correct–
23 A Yes.
24 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
25 Q –at some point?

83
1 A Yes, at some point.
2 Q Okay. Now, I dont understand, and
3 if you can explain to me, how the information that
4 you had told–that you had testified about, the
5 communications regarding the asbestos in the
6 roofing products, the felt in the roofing products
7 was discussed in the 1998 deposition, how come you
8 still testified that Koppers did not become aware
9 of the dangers of asbestos until the early 1980s
10 all the way from 1998 to 2006.
11 A Because, as I remember Charlies
12 testimony, he gave a lot of I assume so answers,
13 and my recollection is that he did not say
14 that–that the company was aware of the dangers
15 associated with asbestos as early as youre
16 indicating because of memberships in
17 organizations.
18 Q What do you believe, as a corporate
19 representative, is necessary to review to
20 determ–in your determination of when a company
21 first became aware of the dangers of asbestos?
22 A I–
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 A I try to review documents from
25 various divisions that I knew; for example, the

84
1 roofing division. I spoke with former employees.
2 Clearly, I had information that appears to be
3 incorrect, even as of today, because I have always
4 said that we began saturating the roofing felts in
5 1964.
6 So my understanding and my testimony
7 has always been based on the documents that were
8 available to me at any given time and
9 conversations with former employees.
10 Q Would you agree with me, based upon
11 the documents that I have shown you that
12 have–indicate active membership by your company
13 in the Industrial Hygiene Foundation where
14 asbestos matters were discussed, that your company
15 was put on notice–
16 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
17 Q –about the dangers of asbestos in
18 the 1960s?
19 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
20 A No.
21 Q And what is your current salary,
22 maam?
23 A I believe its $115,000 a year.
24 Q And thats for your all–is that for
25 the–the Rivers Management Company?

85
1 A Yes.
2 Q And that involves all your
3 association with Beavers East?
4 A Beazer East.
5 Q Beazer East.
6 A Yes.
7 Q Correct?
8 A Correct.
9 Q And do you receive any additional
10 compensation for your testimony?
11 A No.
12 Q When exactly–Id like to know,
13 because you signed so many Answers to
14 Interrogatories over, obviously, a period of
15 time.
16 When exactly did you change your
17 testimony and your–your personal believe as a
18 corporate representative that Beazer became aware
19 of the dangers of asbestos in the 1970s?
20 MR. DUGAN: Objection to the form.
21 A I cant put an exact time frame on
22 that. I just know that I came across some
23 documents in reviewing other documents that–from
24 the roofing division.
25 I think I mentioned earlier that

86
1 there was a memo from–that related to the fact
2 that the EPA was thinking of–of regulating or
3 eliminating asbestos from roofing products, and
4 that there was someone in the roofing division in
5 the 70s who drafted a memo to someone in the
6 industrial hygienist department.
7 Q Right. But weve already established
8 that you knew about that in 1998 from Dr.–from
9 Mr. Flickingers testimony. Correct?
10 A Im sorry?
11 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
12 Q Didnt you know about the–the
13 controversy concerning the asbestos in the roofing
14 products from Mr. Flickingers testimony?
15 A I knew about that from the memo–no,
16 from the memo that I saw from Jack West to–to
17 someone in the industrial hygiene department.
18 That was–that was the basis for that–
19 Q Right. But didnt–
20 A –not Charlies testimony.
21 Q But didnt Mr. Flickinger discuss
22 that as well?
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 A I dont think he testified to the
25 roofing divisions products. I dont believe he

87
1 did.
2 Q Okay. Well, well get to that on a
3 break.
4 Well, lets go over your testimony
5 before about–your testimony as late as 2008,
6 which is on March 3rd–March 10th of 2008, when
7 you were asked, When did Koppers or Beazer become
8 aware of the dangers associated with asbestos
9 exposure?
10 And in that testimony you
11 indicated–the question was, Would that have been
12 in the late 1960s?
13 And your answer was, Yes.
14 And in that testimony you had talked
15 about Dr. Selikoff and you recall Charles
16 Flickinger talking–testifying about Dr. Selikoff
17 and articles in the Wall Street Journal.
18 A Okay.
19 Q Okay. So in the–in March of 2008
20 you believed that asbestos–the knowledge of
21 asbestos was in the late 1960s.
22 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
23 A That Charlie Flickinger started to
24 become aware of that at that point, yes.
25 Q Okay. But your testimony under oath

88
1 today and in your Answers to Interrogatories is
2 the 1970s.
3 A And I thought we went over this
4 before, but I–
5 Q I dont understand. So thats why
6 Im asking again, maam.
7 A Okay.
8 MR. DUGAN: Whats the question?
9 MS. PLACITELLA: The question was
10 Mrs. Wright has testified today, and also
11 consistent with her Answers to
12 Interrogatories, that Koppers first became
13 aware of the dangers of asbestos in the
14 1970s, and in addition to testifying that
15 she–that the company became aware of the
16 dangers of asbestos the first time in the
17 1980s, shes also testified about the
18 company becoming knowledgeable about the
19 dangers of asbestos in the late–in the
20 1960s.
21 A That Charlie–
22 MR. DUGAN: Im going to object to
23 the form.
24 THE WITNESS: Im sorry.
25 A That Charlie Flickinger became aware

89
1 and that he was–my–my understanding of Charlies
2 testimony and having discussed this with him was
3 that he was just–he was starting to see articles
4 in the newspapers. He didnt affiliate it with
5 Koppers Company because we werent in the asbestos
6 industry.
7 My recollection from talking to him
8 was that he was–that the articles he was
9 referring to dealt with asbestos workers or miners
10 or millers, that type of thing, and not any kind
11 of employee of Koppers Company.
12 Q I understand that, maam. But you
13 just testified that Koppers sold
14 asbestos-containing products as early as 1944.
15 MR. DUGAN: No. Objection.
16 A No.
17 Q No. Im sorry. Thats incorrect.
18 That Koppers manufactured
19 asbestos-containing equipment as early as 1944.
20 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
21 A No. I didnt say that either.
22 Koppers Company, in the design and
23 construction of coke ovens, did incorporate
24 asbestos-containing pipe covering as early as
25 1944.

90
1 Q Right.
2 Q And again, my rec–my understanding
3 of that is that Koppers Company always hired
4 not–not people out of a union hall to do that,
5 but rather outside contractors.
6 So they would have been hiring George
7 V. Hamilton, or–or some company like that, you
8 know, Armstrong Cork, to come in and install
9 asbestos-containing pipe covering.
10 Q Right. So, in other words, your
11 company dealt with asbestos as early as 1944.
12 Correct?
13 A Yes. That is correct, yes.
14 Q And yet its your testimony that
15 your–that your company had no obligation to learn
16 about asbestos even though they used asbestos as
17 early as 1994.
18 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
19 Q Yes or no.
20 A No, because Koppers Company–
21 Q Right, no.
22 Its your–its your testimony that
23 Koppers did not have an obligation to learn about
24 asbestos because they werent an asbestos company
25 even though they used asbestos–

91
1 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
2 Q –as early as 1944.
3 MR. DUGAN: Dont answer that.
4 Q Correct?
5 MR. DUGAN: Dont answer that.
6 Q So you indicated to me that you
7 cannot tell me how many Answers to Interrogatories
8 that you have certified wherein you stated that
9 Koppers became aware of the dangers of asbestos in
10 the early 1980s.
11 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
12 Q Did I say that correctly?
13 MR. DUGAN: Objection. Asked and
14 answered.
15 A Thats correct.
16 MR. DUGAN: Lets move on.
17 Q So now did I–how many Answers to
18 Interrogatories did you certify on behalf of
19 Koppers or Beazer East that Koppers first became
20 aware of the dangers of asbestos in the late
21 1960s?
22 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
23 A I cant tell you that.
24 Q How many Answers to Interrogatories
25 have you certified that indicate that Koppers

92
1 first became aware of asbestos in the early to
2 mid-1970s?
3 A Koppers became aware of asbestos a
4 long time before the 1970s.
5 You mean the dangers of asbestos?
6 Q Correct.
7 A I cant tell you that.
8 Q So in–in addition to this particular
9 Answers to Interrogatories, which is P-8, you
10 cannot tell me how many other Answers to
11 Interrogatories that you have certified; is that
12 correct?
13 A Thats correct.
14 Q Is it fair to say, based upon your
15 testimony in 2006 and 2008, that it has to be
16 somewhat recent that Koppers has maintained this
17 position?
18 A Thats probably correct, yes.
19 Q Okay. Are you aware of the Tripoli
20 case?
21 A Tripoli?
22 Q Tripoli.
23 Is that–am I saying it right?
24 A No. Youre saying Tripoli. Tripoli
25 is correct.

93
1 Q Oh, Im sorry. Tripoli.
2 Are you aware of the Tripoli case?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And that was a $7 million verdict
5 against Beazer East that occurred in early this
6 year or late 2008. Correct?
7 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
8 Im going to instruct her not to
9 answer. Its beyond the scope of the
10 notice.
11 MS. PLACITELLA: You cant–for the
12 record, youre aware of the New Jersey
13 rules.
14 MR. DUGAN: Im instructing her not
15 to answer.
16 MS. PLACITELLA: The only way that
17 you can object is attorney/client privilege
18 or confidentiality order.
19 If you want to tell me that–
20 MR. DUGAN: Shes been designated to
21 speak as to two areas, and thats what shes
22 prepared to testify to.
23 MS. PLACITELLA: Can I just state for
24 the record–
25 MR. DUGAN: Anything else is not a

94
1 general witness, and Im instructing her not
2 to answer.
3 MS. PLACITELLA: Are you telling me,
4 Counselor, that the $7 million verdict is
5 under confidential seal?
6 MR. DUGAN: Im not saying anything
7 like that.
8 Im saying its beyond the scope of
9 the notice of your deposition. As a
10 corporate designee, shes not here to
11 testify as to those matters.
12 MS. PLACITELLA: My understanding is
13 that a corporate designee on the dangers of
14 asbestos can testify about verdicts, number
15 of asbestos-related cases, and so forth.
16 So I respectfully disagree. I will
17 ask my–
18 MR. DUGAN: You havent asked about
19 that. Thats not specified in your notice
20 of deposition.
21 Lets move on.
22 Q Now, did–did the–did your Answers
23 to Interrogatories, the change in your Answers to
24 Interrogatory have anything to do with the
25 particular verdict that I just spoke about?

95
1 A No.
2 Q Referring to Item No. 10 in–on your
3 Answers to Interrogatories, that is also listed on
4 page 10, your answer regarding a library indicates
5 that Koppers maintained a research library from
6 1951 to 1988.
7 And you testified about that already
8 today. Correct?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And your testimony was that the
11 documents–any document that may have–that may
12 have pertained to asbestos-related matters that
13 were contained in the library are no longer
14 available.
15 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
16 Q Is that–is that fair to say?
17 A I dont know that there were any
18 documents associated with asbestos in the
19 library. But to the extent that there were, all
20 the documents in the library were divided up among
21 the various purchasers of the chemical division in
22 1988 and 89.
23 Q Are you aware that Mr. Flickinger
24 testified that he received Industrial Hygiene
25 Foundation Digests and reviewed them?

96
1 A Again, I have not reviewed Charlies
2 testimony lately. Im not disputing that he might
3 have testified to that. Im just saying, as I sit
4 here today, I dont recall that.
5 Q Okay. And are you aware that Mr.
6 Flickinger testified that he reviewed current and
7 prior issues of Industrial Hygiene Foundation?
8 A Current and–
9 Q In other words, the current digest of
10 that particular year.
11 A Current to what year?
12 Q That he–that–any particular time,
13 and prior to his employment, I–I would imagine.
14 That was his testimony.
15 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
16 A I have no idea.
17 Q Let me see if I can find it.
18 Oh, I know where it is.
19 Im going to draw your attention to
20 page 43 of Mr. Flickingers testimony, and it
21 says, Do you recall whether there were old,
22 already existing publications of the Industrial
23 Hygiene Foundation there at Verona?
24 And the answer was, Yes, I believe
25 there were.

97
1 Now, was Verona the location of the
2 library that you talked about?
3 A It was in the early years.
4 Q Okay. And when was–when was the
5 library located in Verona?
6 A Its in our Answers to
7 Interrogatories.
8 I think 1951, I want to say.
9 Q Okay. 1951 to 1960.
10 A Okay.
11 Q So, based upon this testimony of your
12 industrial hygienist, from 1951 to 1960 he
13 reviewed old, existing publications, and were
14 talking about Industrial Hygiene Foundation at the
15 Verona library.
16 A He said they were at the Verona
17 library. Right?
18 Q Right.
19 A Yeah.
20 Q Okay. Oh, youre right.
21 And then the next question is,
22 …did you ever look through back issues of the
23 ACGIH publications to determine in terms of
24 research what had been done on particular
25 substances?

98
1 And then the answer was, That was
2 one of the references that I used.
3 And then on page 44 he goes on to
4 say–I–I dont want to read it out of context, so
5 Ill read the whole thing.
6 And did you ever look through back
7 issues–did I say that already?–of the ACGIH
8 publications to determine in terms of research
9 what had been done on particular substances?
10 And his answer was, Yes, that was
11 one–no. That was one of the references that I
12 used.
13 MR. DUGAN: You read that part
14 before.
15 Q In addition to the chemical
16 abstracts and going back to the five-year
17 summaries on that, you would also look back in
18 older issues of IHF abstracts, is that correct?
19 And the answer is, Yes.
20 But then he goes on to
21 quali–quan–qualify that.
22 It says, Do you remember ever doing
23 that for asbestos?
24 And he said, No. I believe I
25 accepted the, you know, the information that was

99
1 available at the time of, you know, the
2 preparation of the data sheet.
3 QUESTION: The material from the
4 chemical abstracts, the current chemical abstracts
5 or the ACGIH?
6 And answer is, Well, they had a
7 publication on the TLVs and that contained, you
8 know, information relative to the hazards and the,
9 in a sense, the background, toxicidity data,
10 health hazard and that.
11 A Hes talking about material safety
12 data sheets.
13 Q Correct.
14 A Yeah, okay.
15 Q Okay. And if you take the testimony
16 in context, hes talking about the history of the
17 Verona facility, which was from 1951 to 1960.
18 Are you aware of that?
19 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
20 A Youre asking–it seems to me that
21 those are two different things.
22 One of them was that they were
23 located at–they were–those articles were located
24 at one point in Verona, and then the question
25 turned to whether or not he was–he reviewed

100
1 them. That doesnt indicate that they were in
2 Verona at that–at that time.
3 Q Okay. Thats your testimony, maam.
4 I understand.
5 Its fair to say, though, that Mr.
6 Flickinger did review, review digests of the
7 Industrial Hygiene Foundation–
8 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
9 Q –from his testimony. Correct?
10 A From his testimony for purposes of
11 material safety data sheets, yes.
12 Q Yes. Okay.
13 A Right.
14 Q As a general principle, do you
15 believe that a company should test its products to
16 determine if they are dangerous before the product
17 is sold?
18 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
19 Dont answer that.
20 MS. PLACITELLA: As we discussed,
21 Counsel, you cant instruct the witness–
22 MR. DUGAN: I just did.
23 MS. PLACITELLA: –not to answer
24 unless its in terms of privilege–
25 MR. DUGAN: Ask another question.

101
1 MS. PLACITELLA: –or…
2 Q As a corporate representative, do you
3 believe that a company should test its product to
4 determine if they are dangerous before the product
5 is sold?
6 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
7 She has not been produced on that
8 issue as a corporate representative. Shes
9 been produced on two issues that were
10 specified in your notices. This is beyond
11 that.
12 Im instructing her not to answer.
13 Q Maam, are you being instructed not
14 to answer the question because you know that
15 Koppers did not test its products before they were
16 sold to the public?
17 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
18 Dont answer that.
19 Q Were your prod–were Koppers
20 products tested for–tested for the–regarding the
21 asbestos dust counts prior to them being sold to
22 the public?
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 MS. PLACITELLA: Its part of your
25 Answers to Interrogatories, Counselor.

102
1 MR. DUGAN: Im objecting to the
2 question.
3 Q Were studies done by Koppers to test
4 the health effects of inhalation of asbestos dust
5 or its fibers?
6 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
7 Youre talking about a time frame?
8 MS. PLACITELLA: Ever.
9 A For the roofing products that
10 contained asbestos, no. They relied on the
11 National Roofing Contractors Association.
12 Q So no tests were done. Correct?
13 A Not by Koppers.
14 Q Do you, as a general principle and a
15 corporate representative, believe that a company
16 has a duty to warn purchasers of its product about
17 any potential hazards associated with the use of
18 the product?
19 MR. DUGAN: Objection. Again, beyond
20 the scope–
21 MS. PLACITELLA: That has to do with
22 warnings, which is totally relevant to the
23 Answers to Interrogatories, Counsel.
24 Theres a question on the Answers to
25 Interrogatories.

103
1 Ill ask the question again.
2 Q As a general principle, do you
3 believe that a company has a duty to warn
4 purchasers of its product about any potential
5 hazards associated with that product?
6 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
7 A That assumes that theres a problem,
8 or that theres a potential problem with the
9 product.
10 Q So do you believe, as a general
11 principle, that they have a duty to warn or not?
12 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
13 Dont answer that.
14 Q When were warnings put on
15 asbestos-containing products of Koppers?
16 A I think I already testified that the
17 roofing division in 1981, 80 to 81, in the
18 Sweets manual, which is the only division that
19 manufactured asbestos-containing products, placed
20 warnings in the Sweets manual about that one
21 particular type of insulation, that the other
22 products that contained asbestos from the roofing
23 division were exempted from warnings by EPA–
24 Q I understand that.
25 A –and OSHA.

104
1 Q So, in other words, warnings were put
2 on the products in 1981.
3 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
4 Q Correct?
5 A It was put on one product in–
6 Q One product in 1981.
7 A 80. And 1980. For asbestos.
8 There were other warnings.
9 Q Are you aware that Koppers own
10 industrial hygienist, Mr. Flickinger, has
11 testified that he believes Koppers had an
12 obligation to warn purchasers about any potential
13 hazards associated with that product?
14 A Im aware of his testimony on that,
15 yes.
16 Q Ill show it to you.
17 A I said I was aware of it.
18 Q I know.
19 QUESTION: Do you believe that
20 Koppers had an obligation to warn purchasers of
21 its product about any potential hazards associated
22 with this product?
23 And his answer was, Yes.
24 A And I dont know what this product
25 is.

105
1 Q I believe–are you aware that the
2 context in which Mr. Flickinger was asked this
3 question was very similar to the question that
4 your counselor wont let me ask you, which is a
5 general question about general principles as to
6 whether a company has an obligation to warn
7 purchasers of its–of the product about any
8 potential dangers?
9 It wasnt talking about a specific
10 product manufactured by Koppers.
11 Are you aware of that?
12 A That says this product.
13 Q Correct. But thats–
14 A Thats not a general principle
15 question. Thats a question about this product,
16 and I dont know the context in which this
17 product is.
18 Q Right. I understand.
19 So you obviously have a disagreement
20 with Mr. Flickinger. Correct?
21 A No.
22 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
23 Q Oh, so you do believe–
24 A I dont know what–what this
25 product is.

106
1 Q Well, why dont we go–
2 A So I dont know–
3 Q Why dont we go, like they say, go to
4 the videotape.
5 I showed you page 66 before. You can
6 see its just general product. Its not talking
7 about a specific product.
8 A To the divisions or from the
9 divisions…
10 Q Its talking about your engineering
11 division, products generally. Its not talking
12 about a specific product.
13 A Because Koppers Company didnt
14 manufacture–engineering construction division
15 didnt manufacture any asbestos-containing
16 products.
17 Q Okay. So well rephrase the
18 question.
19 Do you believe that a company has an
20 obligation to warn purchasers of its product about
21 any potential hazards associated with that
22 product?
23 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
24 Q Im asking you that question.
25 MR. DUGAN: Objection.

107
1 A I cant answer that. Its so broad.
2 Q Okay. You cant, so well move on.
3 Are you aware that Mr. Flickinger
4 testified that Koppers owed a duty to warn
5 purchasers as early as the 1940s and thereafter?
6 Were you aware of that from his
7 testimony?
8 QUESTION: And based upon your prior
9 testimony, you agree that Koppers had an
10 obligation to inform people of the potential
11 hazards of products that Koppers produced that
12 contained asbestos in the 40s or 50s or
13 60s, correct?
14 And his answer was, Yes.
15 Do you–were you aware of his
16 testimony?
17 A I was aware of his testimony. But
18 Koppers–
19 Q Thank you.
20 Now, were you aware of–that Mr.
21 Flickinger also testified that Kopper–Koppers had
22 a duty to warn other people at the facility, such
23 as subcontractors?
24 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
25 A I dont recall that.

108
1 Q Okay. Ill show you his testimony.
2 QUESTION: Did Koppers engineering
3 and construction division, do you believe they had
4 an obligation to warn bystanders of the hazards of
5 the materials they were putting?
6 ANSWER: The term bystanders would
7 mean?
8 QUESTION: People who werent
9 working for Koppers that were in the area.
10 ANSWER: But were plant personnel?
11 QUESTION: Or working for other
12 contractors.
13 ANSWER: I would assume so.
14 QUESTION: You believe Koppers had
15 an obligation to warn those people of the hazards
16 of any products they were using?
17 ANSWER: Yes.
18 Were you aware of his testimony?
19 A Again, I have not reviewed Charlies
20 testimony lately. Im sure I was aware of it at
21 some point.
22 Q Now, lets go back to your Answers to
23 Interrogatories.
24 Number 14 addresses the issue of
25 workers compensation claims.

109
1 A Right.
2 Q And your answer was as early as the
3 80s, when the first third-party asbestos claim
4 was received, around the same time a related
5 workers compensation claim was received.
6 Did I paraphrase that answer
7 correctly?
8 A Thats correct.
9 Q Okay. How many workers compensation
10 claims have been filed–
11 A I dont know.
12 Q –regarding asbestos?
13 A I dont know.
14 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay.
15 Counsel, are you aware that,
16 according to the rulings by Judge McCormick,
17 that counsel has–has–has a right to this
18 information?
19 MR. DUGAN: Whats that?
20 Im not answering questions.
21 What–
22 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay.
23 Are you aware–the answer was not
24 provided in the Answers to Interrogatories,
25 and Im just asking you if youre aware that

110
1 Judge McCormick has ruled that plaintiffs
2 counsel is aware, is–is–no–plaintiffs
3 counsel is permitted to receive this
4 information.
5 MR. DUGAN: I dont know if thats
6 correct.
7 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay.
8 Well, I want to tell you that Im
9 go–I am at this point making a formal
10 request for information concerning workers
11 compensation claims that have been filed
12 regarding asbestos-related injuries.
13 Okay?
14 MR. DUGAN: You can make the
15 request–
16 MS. PLACITELLA: Okay.
17 MR. DUGAN: –and follow it up in
18 writing, and Ill respond accordingly–
19 MS. PLACITELLA: Thank you.
20 MR. DUGAN: –to question 14(d).
21 MS. PLACITELLA: Well, why dont we
22 take a break now. He said two minutes
23 left. Im almost done.
24 MR. DUGAN: Youre almost done?
25 MS. PLACITELLA: Uh-huh.

111
1 MR. DUGAN: Okay.
2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record at
3 1:21.
4 (A short recess was taken.)
5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Were back on the
6 video record at 1:32.
7 BY MS. PLACITELLA:
8 Q Maam, you testified before the break
9 that you didnt–were not aware of how many
10 workers compensation claims have been filed since
11 the early 80s, when the first one was filed; is
12 that correct?
13 A Thats correct.
14 Q Who would have that information?
15 A I dont know that that information is
16 able to be determined. And the reason I say that
17 is that workers compensation claims were managed
18 by an outside company in the early 1980s. It was
19 named–oh, dear, Im drawing a blank–Johnson &
20 Johnson. It was an insurance brokerage firm. It
21 ultimately became part of Marsh. And the records
22 of those–that kind of information was maintained
23 by Marsh, not by Koppers, and Ive tried to find
24 that information, and I cannot find it.
25 Q Who was the–was there ever a person

112
1 from–was there ever an employee from Koppers in
2 the early 1980s who managed the workers
3 compensation files?
4 A Not the files. There was a person in
5 the early 1980s in–who was the insurance manager
6 who worked with Marsh, and hes now deceased. Im
7 trying to remember his name. Ron Perry, I
8 believe, P-e-r-r-y. I believe hes deceased.
9 Q And who was the insurance manager in
10 the 1990s?
11 A That would have been Jack Gallie,
12 G-a-l-l-i-e. Jack I believe became insurance
13 manager in 1988.
14 Q Is he still living?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And do you know his whereabouts?
17 A He lives in the north of Pittsburgh.
18 Q Was there any other employee who
19 managed the workers compensation files?
20 A No. That was always a function of
21 the insurance department.
22 Q Who was the insurance carrier for the
23 medical and workers compensation claims?
24 A When?
25 Q From the beginning of time.

113
1 A Well, it depended–
2 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
3 A It depended upon the state, to be
4 honest with you. In some states Koppers Company
5 was self-insured, and in some states it had–there
6 was a state plan, and to some extent the coverage
7 I believe from 1945 to 1960 in certain states was
8 managed–or was writ–underwritten by Zurich. And
9 then from 1960 until I believe 19–I want to say
10 1976 was Aetna, and then from 76 through I want
11 to say 1990 it was–it was Travelers. Im sorry.
12 It might be till 86 with Travelers.
13 Q So from 1940 to 1960 it was Zurich?
14 A 42, I believe.
15 Q 1942 to 1960 it was Zurich?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Okay. Did Zurich ever inform Koppers
18 about the dangers of asbestos?
19 A Not that Im aware of.
20 Q Who would know that?
21 A I dont know.
22 Q Have you seen any documentation
23 regarding workers compensation files?
24 A No.
25 Q Have you seen any documentation

114
1 concerning the insurance carriers contract?
2 A Ive seen insurance coverage
3 policies, yes.
4 Q Do the policies refer to asbestos at
5 all?
6 A Not–not the Zurich policies, no.
7 Q Okay. What policies pertain to
8 asbestos?
9 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
10 A In–there was an asbestos exclusion,
11 I believe, that became part of The Travelers
12 policy I want to say in 1985, 86, something along
13 that line.
14 Q Have there been any workers
15 compensation trials that youre aware of?
16 A Not that Im aware of.
17 Q Would you have been made aware if
18 there were?
19 A I dont know that. I dont–I dont
20 believe so.
21 Q Have you ever–have you ever
22 testified at trial in an asbestos-related matter?
23 A No, I have not.
24 Q Has your testimony from your
25 deposition ever been used in trial, that youre

115
1 aware of?
2 A It has not.
3 Q You referred to Mr. Flickingers
4 testimony regarding issues that he raised–strike
5 that.
6 You referred to Dr.–you–you
7 referred to Mr. Flickingers testimony regarding
8 asbestos-related issues which led you to the
9 belief at one point that Koppers was aware of the
10 dangers of asbestos in the 1960s.
11 Is there any testimony that Mr.
12 Flickinger has given other than the 1998
13 transcript that I have discussed with you today?
14 A No–
15 MR. DUGAN: Objection to the form.
16 A –he has not given any other
17 testimony.
18 Q Have you been the corporate
19 representative for Koppers Company or Beazer East
20 exclusively in–in this decade, 2000?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Have you been the corporate
23 representative exclusively for asbestos litigation
24 purposes in the 1990s?
25 A I dont know if Jill Blundon

116
1 testified at one point for Koppers Company, I
2 would have to go back and check that, because she
3 usually testifies on behalf of Thiem Corporation.
4 Q At this point youre not aware if she
5 ever testified as a corporate representative on
6 behalf of Beazer East?
7 A Thats right–
8 Q Would she–
9 A –for asbestos purposes.
10 Q For asbestos purposes coming from
11 Koppers.
12 A Yes.
13 Q Now, I believe that was the 90s.
14 Now Im going back to the 1980s.
15 Who had been the designated corporate
16 representative in asbestos litigation in the
17 1980s?
18 A I dont think there was one. Im not
19 aware of one.
20 Q For the past 20 years, you have
21 indicated that you have spent a significant period
22 of time on asbestos litigation matters on behalf
23 of Beazer East.
24 Is that–was that your testimony
25 today?

117
1 A Yes.
2 Q Okay. And is it also fair to say
3 that prior to today, that even though that youve
4 spent so much time with dealing with asbestos
5 litigation matters, that you were unaware of
6 certain vice presidents relationship
7 as–no–certain–strike that.
8 Is it fair to say that before today
9 you were unaware that certain vice presidents of
10 Kopper (sic) had played an active role in the
11 Industrial Hygiene Foundation?
12 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
13 A I was deposed recently in South
14 Carolina, and I know that we reviewed some
15 of–some information associated with different
16 organizations. Im just not recalling, as I sit
17 here today, whether it was the exact same
18 Industrial Hygiene Foundation that you referred to
19 or whether it was other organizations.
20 Q Now, this deposition, when did that
21 take place?
22 A June 19–in June of this year.
23 Q June of–was that the telephone
24 deposition?
25 A No.

118
1 Q Oh, it was in person?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Okay. And are you telling me that
4 you may have testified about another hygiene
5 organization that Koppers was a member of?
6 A No, no, no.
7 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
8 A No. What Im saying–Im sorry if I
9 wasnt clear. What Im saying is I was asked
10 questions about Koppers involvement in
11 organizations at that deposition.
12 Im just not recalling, as I sit here
13 today, whether those questions related to the
14 Industrial Hygiene–were the exact same people in
15 the same organizations that you asked me about
16 today. Thats the only thing Im saying. But
17 what you showed me today I was not aware of having
18 seen before.
19 Q Now, youve testified–weve talked
20 today about my client, Jerry Johnson, and as
21 youre aware, Mr. Johnson has testified that he
22 believes he was exposed to asbestos when he
23 installed asbestos cement boards to a facility on
24 the Koppers property.
25 You are aware of that. Correct?

119
1 A Yes.
2 Q And based upon the review of–based
3 upon his testimony indicating that he knew that
4 mothballs were made or manufactured in the plant,
5 that you were able to determine that it was the
6 Meadow (sic) Plant. Correct?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Okay. Do you have any evidence to
9 contradict Mr. Johnsons testimony?
10 MR. DUGAN: Objection.
11 A No.
12 MS. PLACITELLA: Whats the basis of
13 your objection?
14 MR. DUGAN: What testimony are you
15 asking about contradicting?
16 Q Do you have any basis to
17 contradict–do–strike that.
18 Do you have any evidence to
19 contradict Mr. Johnsons testimony that he
20 believes he was exposed to asbestos when he
21 installed asbestos cement boards at the Meadow
22 Plant in Kearny, New Jersey?
23 A No, I dont have any independent
24 information.
25 MS. PLACITELLA: Thats all I have.

120
1 Thank you. Off the record. Thank you.
2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the video
3 record at 1:43 p.m.
4 (The videotape deposition of Mary
5 Dombrowski Wright concluded at 1:43 p.m.,
6 and the following exhibits were marked for
7 identification:
8 Notice to Take Deposition and Demand
9 for Production of Documents, dated 8/26/09,
10 3 pages, received and marked Exhibit P-1A;
11 Notice to Take Deposition and Demand
12 for Production of Documents, dated 8/26/09,
13 3 pages, received and marked Exhibit P-1B;
14 Deposition transcript of Mary
15 Dombrowski Wright taken in the Mon Mass II
16 asbestos litigation on 6/27/97, 116 pages,
17 received and marked Exhibit P-2;
18 Deposition transcript of Mary
19 Dombrowski Wright taken in the Gregory v.
20 A.W. Chesteron, et al., asbestos litigation
21 on 3/1/06, 395 pages, received and marked
22 Exhibit P-3;
23 Deposition transcript of Mary
24 Dombrowski Wright taken in the Wendt v.
25 Asbestos Defendants (BP) litigation on

121
1 3/10/08, 59 pages, received and marked
2 Exhibit P-4;
3 Koppers Company, Inc. Safety Plan,
4 Revised 2/17/54, 11 pages, received and
5 marked Exhibit P-5;
6 N.J. Department of Labor & Industry,
7 Bureau of Engineering & Safety, Safety
8 Regulation No. 3, Establishing Threshold
9 Limit Values for Dusts, Vapors, Fumes, Gases
10 and Mists, Effective 10/30/58, 14 pages,
11 received and marked Exhibit P-6;
12 Sweets Architectural Catalog File,
13 1959, pertaining to Koppers Company, Inc.,
14 30 pages, received and marked Exhibit P-7;
15 Defendant Beazer East Inc.s
16 Responses to Plaintiffs Supplemental
17 Interrogatories, dated 11/5/09, certified to
18 by Mary Dombrowski Wright, 32 pages,
19 received and marked Exhibit P-8;
20 1953 Memberships and Representatives
21 of Koppers Company, Inc., 35 pages, received
22 and marked Exhibit P-9;
23 IHF Annual Report 1975, 16 pages,
24 received and marked Exhibit P-10;
25 Deposition transcript of Charles

122
1 Flickinger taken in the Greco, et al. v.
2 A-Best Products Company, et al., asbestos
3 litigation on 6/11/98, 80 pages, received
4 and marked Exhibit P-11;
5 Mellon Institute of Industrial
6 Research, University of Pittsburgh, Progress
7 Report, dated 9/15/42, signed by Francis R.
8 Holden, 1 page, received and marked Exhibit
9 P-12;
10 Mellon Institute Industrial Hygiene
11 Digest, October 1955, 60 pages, received and
12 marked Exhibit P-13;
13 Mellon Institute Industrial Hygiene
14 Digest, February 1956, 41 pages, received
15 and marked Exhibit P-14;
16 Mellon Institute Industrial Hygiene
17 Foundation Minutes of Annual Membership
18 Meeting, 10/26/61, and Summary of 1961
19 Activities, 18 pages, received and marked
20 Exhibit P-15;
21 Letter dated 12/21/77 from Braun to
22 Kennedy, with attached members of IHF Board
23 of Trustees, 4 pages, received and marked
24 Exhibit P-16;
25 1946 Partial Membership Roster of

123
1 American Ceramic Society, 1 page, received
2 and marked Exhibit P-17; and
3 Johns-Manville Internal
4 Correspondence dated 12/7/73, from Hendry to
5 Hutcheson, 39 pages, received and marked
6 Exhibit P-18.)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

124
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2 I, EDWIN SILVER (Certificate No.
3 XI00379), Certified Court Reporter and Notary
4 Public of the State of New Jersey, do hereby
5 certify that prior to the commencement of the
6 examination MARY DOMBROWSKI WRIGHT was duly sworn
7 by me to testify the truth, the whole truth and
8 nothing but the truth.
9 I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that the
10 foregoing is a true and accurate transcript of the
11 testimony as taken stenographically by and before
12 me at the time, place and on the date hereinbefore
13 set forth.
14 I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am
15 neither a relative nor employee nor attorney nor
16 counsel of any of the parties to this action, and
17 that I am neither a relative nor employee of such
18 attorney or counsel, and that I am not financially
19 interested in the action.
20
21
22 —————————————-
23 Notary Public of the State of New Jersey
24 My Commission expires January 12, 2013
25 Dated: November 28, 2009