Exhibit 13

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 1 of 218 PageID:

43920
Page 1

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

 CIVIL ACTION NO: 11-cv-1754 (JLL) (JAD)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -:

 KIMBERLEE WILLIAMS, et al, :

 :

 Plaintiffs, : DEPOSITION UPON

 : ORAL EXAMINATION

 vs. :

 : of

 BASF CATALYSTS, LLC, et al, :

 : MICHAEL JAMES

 Defendants. : HASSETT

 :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -:

 West Orange, New Jersey

 Tuesday, April 24, 2018

 DEPOSITION of MICHAEL JAMES HASSETT

in the above-entitled action by and before PATRICIA J.

RUSSONIELLO, a Certified Court Reporter and Notary

Public of the State of New Jersey, at the office of

ARLEO & DONOHUE, LLC, 622 Eagle Rock Avenue,

commencing at 10:11 a.m.

 Magna Legal Services

 866-624-6221

 www.MagnaLS.com

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 2 of 218 PageID:

43921
Page 2

1 A P P E A R A N C E S:

2 COHEN PLACITELLA ROTH, PC

 By JARED M. PLACITELLA, ESQ.

3 CHRISTOPHER M. PLACITELLA, ESQ.

 Two Commerce Square

4 2001 Market Street, Suite 2900

 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

5 127 Maple Avenue

 Red Bank, New Jersey 07701

6 Tel: (732) 747-9003 Tel: (215) 567-9003

 jmplacitella@cprlaw.com

7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

8 KIRKLAND & ELLIS, LLP

 By DANIEL A. BRESS, ESQ.

9 RONALD K. ANGUAS, JR., ESQ.

 655 Fifteenth Street, N.W.

10 Washington, D.C. 20005

 Tel: (202) 879-5152

11 daniel.bress@kirkland.com

 ronald.anguas@kirkland.com

12 Attorneys for BASF Catalysts, LLC

13 PEPPER HAMILTON, LLP

 By ANTHONY VALE, ESQ.

14 3000 Two Logan Square

 18th and Arch Streets

15 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2799

 Tel: (215) 981-4000 Fax: (215) 981-4750

16 valea@pepperlaw.com

 Attorneys for Defendants, Cahill Gordon,

17 Peter Sloane and Ira Dembrow

18 ARLEO & DONOHUE, LLC

 By TIMOTHY M. DONOHUE, ESQ.

19 622 Eagle Rock Avenue

 West Orange, New Jersey 07052

20 Tel: (973) 736-8660 Fax: (973) 736-1712

 Attorneys for Deponent

21

22

A P P E A R A N C E S: (Continued on next page)

23

24

25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 3 of 218 PageID:

43922
Page 3

1 A P P E A R A N C E S: (Continued)

2 MARINO, TORTORELLA & BOYLE, P.C.

 By PHILLIP S. PAVLICK, ESQ. (via telephone)

3 437 Southern Boulevard

 Chatham, New Jersey 07928

4 Tel: (973) 824-9300 Fax: (973) 824-8425

 ppavlick@khmarino.com

5 Attorneys for Defendant, Arthur Dornbusch

6 HEROLD LAW, P.A.

 By ERIC TUNIS, ESQ. (via telephone)

7 25 Independence Boulevard

 Warren, New Jersey 07059-6747

8 Tel: (908) 647-1022 Fax: (908) 647-7721

 etunis@herold.com

9 Attorneys for Defendant, Thomas Halket

10

A L S O P R E S E N T:

11

 Thomas Karwacki, Videographer

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 4 of 218 PageID:

43923
Page 4

1 I N D E X

2 WITNESS EXAMINATION BY

3 MICHAEL JAMES HASSETT

By Mr. Jared Placitella 8

4

5

6

7

 E X H I B I T S

8

NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE

9

Hassett-1 Six-page Notice Of Video 9

10 Deposition Of Michael Hassett,

 Esq., and attached Certificate

11 of Service

12 Hassett-1A One-page Interoffice Memorandum 186

 12/23/91 and attached Engelhard

13 Record Retention Manual

 (BASF_Sampson 39958-39998)

14

Exhibit 1 Multi-page Cahill Collection 86

15 Of Testing Document (Excluding

 Privileged Documents) (P-15)

16

Exhibit 3 Transcript (Glenn Hemstock) 91

17 3/16/83 (BASF-Sampson 14462-

 14601)

18

Exhibit 4 Transcript (Peter Gale) 94

19 4/26/83 (JNJ-Ros 9712-9792)

20 Hassett 5 One-page letter, 8/20/02 58

 and attached settlement list

21 (BASF-Williams 390446-390460)

22 Hassett 7 One-page letter, 5/9/06 and 175

 attached Release (BASF FC 12168-

23 12171)

24 Hassett 10 Two-page Merten to Cuzzone 168

 letter, 8/2/04 and attachments

25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 5 of 218 PageID:

43924
Page 5

1 E X H I B I T S (continued)

2 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE

3 Exhibit 11 Multi-page document, re, 69

 Excerpted Entries from

4 Privilege Log of BASF

 Catalysts LLC

5

Exhibit 14 Multi-page Summary Of 167

6 Activities Related To Services

 Rendered For Decof & Grimm

7 (BASF-Lopez 21666-21681)

8 Exhibit 15 One-page Interoffice 105

 Memorandum, 3/7/84 (BASF 00157)

9

Exhibit 57 Responses By Engelard 114

10 Corporation To Plaintiffs'

 First Standard Set Of Liability

11 Interrogatories (BASF FC 14202-

 14256)

12

Exhibit 60 Multi-page Defendant Eastern 155

13 Magnesia Talc Company's Answers

 To Plaintiff's Interrogatories

14 (BASF FC 12190-12204)

15 Exhibit 124 Two-page letter, 5/3/02 147

 (BASF-Williams 40099-40100)

16

Exhibit 203 Defendant Arthur A. Dornbusch 72

17 II's Disclosures Under Rule

 26(a)(1)

18

Exhibit 205 Seven-page Plaintiff Theresa 161

19 Martin's More Responsive Answers

 To Interrogatories Propounded By

20 Eastern Magnesia Company

 (BASF_Williams 334310-334316)

21

22 (Reporter retains all exhibits except Exhibit 7.)

23

24

25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 6 of 218 PageID:

43925
Page 6

1 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS:

2 PAGE LINE

3 66 17 (copies of documents)

4

5

6

7 DIRECTIONS NOT TO ANSWER QUESTIONS:

8 PAGE LINE

9 13 1

 13 4

10 47 21

 50 20

11 51 2

 77 21

12 80 1

 80 8

13 127 1

 146 13

14 152 19

 184 8

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 7 of 218 PageID:

43926
Page 7

1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on the

2 record. This begins videotape number 1 in the

3 deposition of Michael Hassett in the matter of

4 Kimberlee Williams, et al, versus BASF Catalysts, LLC,

5 et al, in the United States District Court for the

6 District of New Jersey.

7 Today is Tuesday April 24th, 2018 and

8 the time is 10:11 a.m.

9 This deposition is being taken at 622

10 Eagle Rock Avenue, West Orange, New Jersey, at the

11 request of Cohen, Placitella and Roth.

12 The Videographer is Thomas Karwacki of

13 Magna Legal Services and the court reporter is

14 Patricia Russoniello of Magna Legal Services.

15 Will counsel and all parties present

16 state their appearances and whom they represent,

17 please.

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure. I'll

19 start.

20 Jared Placitella for the plaintiffs.

21 MR. CHRISTOPHER PLACITELLA: Chris

22 Placitella.

23 MR. DONOHUE: Tim Donohue, Arleo and

24 Donohue, for the witness, Michael Hassett.

25 MR. BRESS: Dan Bress, Kirkland and

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 8 of 218 PageID:

43927
Page 8

1 Ellis, for BASF.

2 MR. ANGUAS: Ronald Anguas, Kirkland and

3 Ellis, for BASF.

4 MR. VALE: Anthony Vale for Cahill

5 Gordon, Peter Sloane and Ira Dembrow.

6 MR. PAVLICK: Phillip Pavlick of Marino,

7 Tortorella & Boyle for Arthur Dornbusch.

8 MR. TUNIS: Eric Tunis on behalf of

9 Thomas Halket.

10 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the court

11 reporter please swear in the witness.

12 M I C H A E L J A M E S H A S S E T T, having been

13 duly sworn by the Notary, testifies as follows:

14 EXAMINATION BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

15 Q. Good morning, Mr. Hassett.

16 A. Good morning.

17 Q. My name is Jared Placitella. It's nice

18 to meet you.

19 A. Good to meet you.

20 Q. You understand that we're here today for

21 the purposes of taking your deposition?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Have you ever had your deposition taken

24 before?

25 A. Yes.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 9 of 218 PageID:

43928
Page 9

1 Q. When was that?

2 A. Probably very late '90s.

3 Q. And what was the circumstances under

4 which you had your deposition taken?

5 A. It was a case that went to litigation

6 about an insurance claim by Engelhard against AIG.

7 Q. And do you recall what the insurance

8 claim was over?

9 A. Yes. It was a loss of -- a loss

10 relating to base metal inventory held at an Engelhard

11 subsidiary in Japan.

12 Q. And that was the only time you ever had

13 your deposition taken before today?

14 A. That's the only one I can remember.

15 Q. Sure.

16 I'm going to show you what I've marked

17 as Hassett Exhibit 1 for identification; well, Exhibit

18 Hassett-1. Sorry.

19 Have you ever seen this Notice before

20 today?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And when was the first time that you --

23 well, when did you see this Notice of your deposition?

24 A. Recently. Within the past five or six

25 days.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 10 of 218 PageID:

43929
Page 10

1 Q. Okay. So Exhibit Hassett-1 is the

2 Notice of your videotape deposition of Michael

3 Hassett.

4 I want to turn your page -- turn your

5 attention -- excuse me -- to I guess it's Page 4 where

6 it says Requested Documents.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Do you have any documents that are

9 responsive to these requests?

10 A. Review them once more.

11 (Pause.)

12 A. No, I do not.

13 Q. Did you look for documents that were

14 responsive to these requests before today?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And when did you do that?

17 A. Shortly after I saw this. Again, maybe

18 five days ago, four days ago; whatever.

19 Q. Okay. Mr. Hassett, what do you know

20 about this case?

21 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form of the

22 question.

23 A. It's a claim alleging injury due to

24 exposure to asbestos in talc sold by Engelhard.

25 Q. And when did you first become aware of

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 11 of 218 PageID:

43930
Page 11

1 this case; Williams versus BASF Federal?

2 A. Some time within the past few years --

3 I -- I don't -- I don't really remember exactly.

4 Q. Do you recall how you became aware of

5 this case?

6 A. Yes. Attorneys representing BASF

7 arranged to interview me.

8 Q. And who were those attorneys for BASF?

9 A. Well, I'm not sure exactly when this

10 case was initiated.

11 Q. Mm'mm.

12 A. But I -- I think that the first

13 interview after this case was started was actually led

14 by Dan.

15 Q. And do you recall when that interview

16 was?

17 A. Wow. Well, again, I'm not sure exactly

18 when the case started.

19 Q. Mm'mm.

20 A. The -- the first interview with -- with

21 Dan and his firm was -- it was right after a big

22 snowstorm that had created a power failure which is

23 why I remember it. There was no power but that was

24 probably roughly six years ago maybe.

25 Q. All right. And if I told you that this

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 12 of 218 PageID:

43931
Page 12

1 case was filed in 2011 does that help you place the

2 time of that -- the time of this meeting?

3 A. Well, I -- yeah. The -- roughly six

4 would fit with that to some extent.

5 Q. Sure. We have had a lot of snowstorms

6 up here lately, unfortunately.

7 A. This was a -- this was an October

8 snowstorm --

9 Q. Oh, October snow --

10 A. -- that created a lot of power line

11 failures because the trees still had their leaves.

12 Q. Yeah. October snowstorms to April and

13 March snowstorms we can't get away from.

14 Who else besides Mr. Bress was at this

15 meeting?

16 A. There was an associate from Kirkland

17 Ellis whose name I don't remember and I don't think

18 there was anyone else.

19 Q. Did the attorneys from Kirkland and

20 Ellis show you any documents at this meeting?

21 A. I don't remember.

22 Q. What was discussed at this meeting?

23 MR. DONOHUE: All right. At this point

24 I'm going to object on the grounds of attorney-client

25 privilege. I know Mr. -- I didn't mean to interrupt

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 13 of 218 PageID:

43932
Page 13

1 Mr. Bress, but I'm going to instruct the witness not

2 to answer that question.

3 MR. BRESS: I'll join. Attorney-client

4 privilege and instruct you not to answer.

5 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: All right.

6 Q. Do you know the answer to that question,

7 Mr. Hassett?

8 MR. DONOHUE: You can answer that.

9 A. What was the question again, sir?

10 Q. What was discussed at this meeting six

11 years ago with Kirkland attorneys?

12 MR. DONOHUE: Just to clarify --

13 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Mm'mm.

14 Absolutely.

15 MR. DONOHUE: -- you're not to answer

16 what was discussed but --

17 THE WITNESS: I can --

18 MR. DONOHUE: -- I believe --

19 THE WITNESS: -- answer that.

20 MR. DONOHUE: -- the question is are you

21 able to answer that if you weren't instructed?

22 A. I -- I have a --

23 MR. DONOHUE: Do you recall what was --

24 A. I have a --

25 MR. DONOHUE: -- discussed?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 14 of 218 PageID:

43933
Page 14

1 A. I have a very general recollection of

2 what was discussed.

3 Q. What -- did you meet with counsel to

4 prepare for today's deposition?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And who did you meet with?

7 A. It -- well, I met with Tim, Dan, Ronald,

8 and in an earlier session I think there was one of the

9 associates from Tim's firm, Gianna, and there was an

10 associate from Kirkland Ellis, Tia, maybe at one of

11 the prep sessions.

12 Q. All right. Let's take this one at a

13 time.

14 When -- Mr. Hassett, when was the first

15 prep session?

16 A. I'm not sure. It was not that long ago

17 but...

18 Q. Okay. And when was the second prep

19 session?

20 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

21 A. I met Monday -- Monday a week ago I

22 think it was.

23 Q. And a week ago Monday that was your last

24 prep session before today's prep session?

25 A. No. Yesterday was the last prep

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 15 of 218 PageID:

43934
Page 15

1 session.

2 Q. How long did these sessions last?

3 A. Yesterday ran from -- yeah. We really

4 got started around 10:30 or 10:45 and went to a little

5 before 3 I think.

6 Q. Mm'mm.

7 A. And the session the preceding Monday

8 was -- I started at 10 and again I think we -- I think

9 we ended earlier. We might have ended at 1 or

10 something like that.

11 Q. During the prep session last Monday on

12 April 16th were you shown any documents?

13 A. I don't recall any.

14 Q. Okay. And how about yesterday? Were

15 you shown any documents?

16 A. Yes. Let me think. I'm trying to think

17 which -- was which day. Give me one second.

18 Yes. Definitely. Yes.

19 Q. And what documents did you review?

20 A. It was a copy of the replies to

21 Interrogatories in the Chernick case.

22 There was a couple of letters from

23 outside counsel Engelhard employed that appeared to

24 transmit information on talc, Engelhard talc, and

25 there was a copy of Engelhard's old record retention

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 16 of 218 PageID:

43935
Page 16

1 policy.

2 Q. Do you recall which letters from outside

3 counsel you reviewed?

4 A. Well, one was from a firm that a lawyer

5 named Mel Bergstein worked for and his name appeared

6 on the letterhead but I don't remember the firm name.

7 One was from -- or two -- a firm in

8 Washington County, Pennsylvania, but I can't remember

9 the names involved.

10 Q. Do you recall any other letters?

11 A. That's all I can remember about the

12 documents I reviewed yesterday.

13 Q. Besides being with your attorneys did

14 you -- have you conducted any other investigation into

15 this case?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Have you reviewed the Second Amended

18 Complaint?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Have you reviewed the exhibits to the

21 Second Amended Complaint?

22 A. Not -- it -- not that I know of.

23 Q. Okay. Besides speaking with counsel

24 have you spoken with anybody else in preparation for

25 today's deposition?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 17 of 218 PageID:

43936
Page 17

1 A. No.

2 Q. Mr. Hassett, can you provide us with the

3 benefit of your education? Where did you go to

4 undergraduate? Where did you go to law school?

5 A. Undergraduate I -- I went to MIT. Law

6 School I went to Columbia. And I have a second law

7 degree, an LLM, from NYU.

8 Q. And when did you receive your law degree

9 from Columbia?

10 A. 1977.

11 Q. And when did you receive your LLM from

12 NYU?

13 A. 1984.

14 Q. Are you still licensed to practice law?

15 A. I'm on retired status in both New York

16 and New Jersey.

17 Q. Besides New York and New Jersey at any

18 time during your professional career were you licensed

19 in any other state?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Besides the Courts in the states of New

22 York and New Jersey were you admitted to practice in

23 any other Court?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Mr. Hassett, can you take me through

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 18 of 218 PageID:

43937
Page 18

1 your career path following after you graduated law

2 school, Columbia, in 1977?

3 A. For approximately two years I worked in

4 the corporate department of a New York City firm,

5 Breed, Abbott and Morgan, which has merged several

6 times. It may still be around as a collaboration

7 with Whitman Ransom. I'm not sure.

8 Then I -- for approximately two years I

9 worked for a smaller firm in New York City; Spitzer

10 and Feldman. I first joined -- which was also

11 basically corporate and real estate deal-type duties.

12 Q. Mm'mm.

13 A. In 1981 I first joined the Engelhard

14 Industries Legal Department and some time in '84 I

15 became the Engelhard Corporation Legal Department but

16 my role didn't real change.

17 Q. Mm'mm.

18 A. Then also in 1984 I joined another

19 industrial firm, Research-Cottrell, which had its

20 headquarters in Bedminster, New Jersey, again as a --

21 you know, sort of a general corporate lawyer.

22 And I think -- it was 1988 I went back

23 to Engelhard again as a, you know, corporate lawyer in

24 their corporate department -- their Legal Department

25 and stayed at Engelhard until -- well, I went off

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 19 of 218 PageID:

43938
Page 19

1 active duty in 2006 and my salary continuation ended

2 in 2007 I believe.

3 Q. When did you go off active duty in 2006?

4 A. I'm not really sure. It was not too

5 long after the BASF acquisition.

6 Q. And what do you mean by "active duty"?

7 A. Instead of severance pay Engelhard took

8 the approach of offering what they call salary

9 continuation so an employee who was being -- whose

10 employment was being terminated essentially was able

11 to stay on the benefit plans but -- the health benefit

12 plans and receive their base salary until the end of

13 what you might think of as the severance period.

14 Q. Right.

15 A. They were not expected to report for

16 work although at least in theory if anyone wanted to

17 consult with you you were supposed to be available.

18 Q. And during this nonactive period -- I'll

19 call it that -- did BASF ever consult with you?

20 A. I don't remember a single occasion.

21 Q. Did you take any employment after you

22 left BASF?

23 A. No employment. I did a couple of

24 hobby-type things on a freelance basis that weren't

25 law-related, didn't produce any significant income.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 20 of 218 PageID:

43939
Page 20

1 Q. So you haven't practiced since 2006,

2 2007?

3 A. Right.

4 Q. So I want to go back to the beginning of

5 when you joined the Engelhard Industries Legal

6 Department in 1981.

7 What areas were you working in in 1981?

8 A. Well, at the time the lawyer's job was

9 determined by assignment of specific clients, specific

10 businesses within the larger division so I can't -- I

11 don't remember exactly what my clients were when I

12 first -- who my -- which departments were my clients

13 when I first started but in general I would help them

14 with negotiating and drafting contracts for deals they

15 wanted to get into and responding to questions they

16 had and on a -- on occasion if a lawsuit related to a

17 specific business unit I was assigned to take the, you

18 know, lead in getting outside counsel to -- to defend

19 the suit and coordinating any -- anything involved in

20 the lawsuit with the outside counsel in the business

21 unit.

22 Q. If you don't remember the specific

23 client do you remember the industries that those

24 clients were serving?

25 A. Well, it -- if you look to that '81-'84

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 21 of 218 PageID:

43940
Page 21

1 period as a whole --

2 Q. Mm'mm.

3 A. -- at different times I think I

4 represented systems department which made these

5 cathodic protection systems that were based on

6 platinum catalysts.

7 Oh, man.

8 I think I -- I represented the Hanovia

9 liquid gold business based in East Newark at times.

10 Part of it.

11 You know, I think there were others but

12 those are the only two I can think of right now.

13 Q. In 1981 to 1984 what was your formal

14 title?

15 A. I believe I started as assistant counsel

16 and it may have changed to associate counsel or

17 something like that. I'm not -- I'm not positive

18 about those.

19 Q. And from 1981 to 1984 as an assistant or

20 associate general -- general counsel who did you

21 report to?

22 A. For most of that period up until '84 I

23 reported to Ben Campo who was the general counsel of

24 Engelhard Industries division. When the two

25 divisional departments consolidated I began to report

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 22 of 218 PageID:

43941
Page 22

1 to Arthur Dornbusch.

2 Q. And do you recall about when in 1984

3 that consolidation was?

4 A. I don't remember the specific month. I

5 think it was early in the year.

6 Q. When did you leave Engelhard for the

7 first time in 1984?

8 A. I don't remember specifically. I think

9 roughly the middle of '84 maybe.

10 Q. Some time in the summer?

11 A. Pos -- possibly, you know. A couple of

12 months on either side.

13 Q. And then in 1988 you said you came back

14 to Engelhard. Is that right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. What were the circumstances in which

17 that occurred?

18 A. Well, why did I change? What --

19 Q. Well, did Engelhard recruit you back?

20 Did you go back to Engelhard?

21 A. Well, I had stayed in touch with

22 another -- the Engelhard lawyer named Les Fliegel,

23 while I was working at Research-Cottrell, and I -- and

24 I mentioned to Les that thanks to a -- mostly to a

25 leveraged buy-out my duties had changed at ResearchCase 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 23 of 218 PageID:

43942
Page 23

1 Cottrell and I wasn't as happy with the job as I had

2 been originally, and he -- recruit would be a little

3 strong, but he said there might be an opening at

4 Engelhard if I was interested.

5 He probably had mixed feelings about it.

6 So I -- so I --

7 Q. Fair enough.

8 A. -- saw a chance to make a change I

9 thought might work out.

10 Q. And when you came back to Engelhard

11 in -- you said 1988?

12 A. I believe that was '88.

13 Q. Do you recall when in 1988?

14 A. I do not -- no, I don't really remember

15 the month clearly.

16 Q. What were your responsibilities when you

17 came back to Engelhard starting in 1988?

18 A. Well, there was still a similar system

19 where you were assigned to a specific business group

20 or groups, and I was assigned to the -- I think it was

21 called the Precious Metals Management Department at

22 that time. The name changed a few times but it was

23 essentially the group within the company that both

24 managed the physical inventories of precious metal and

25 also ran a trading operation in precious metals.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 24 of 218 PageID:

43943
Page 24

1 Q. And what business units were your

2 clients during this time?

3 A. Just -- that was it.

4 Q. Just precious metals?

5 A. Yes. That -- that was a business which

6 required a fair amount of legal services. It just had

7 one -- one lawyer.

8 Q. And how long were you working in the

9 precious metals business unit?

10 A. Well, that -- other units in Engelhard

11 Industries also worked with precious metals but that

12 specific trading unit I'll call it I was assigned to

13 that duty for -- let's see. '88 to -- that seems

14 long. Wow. '88 to '02? Maybe. I -- I'm not sure.

15 Something along that year. From -- when I first

16 rejoined Engelhard until roughly '02.

17 Q. And then from '02 to 0 --

18 A. Maybe 0 -- maybe '01.

19 Q. '01.

20 From 2001 to 2006 which business unit

21 was your client?

22 A. During that period I was assigned to

23 support the corporate departments rather than a

24 business unit.

25 Q. Okay.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 25 of 218 PageID:

43944
Page 25

1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Sir, your microphone

2 slipped off. Can you put that back?

3 THE WITNESS: Yup. Yup. Sorry.

4 (Pause.)

5 THE WITNESS: Okay?

6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you.

7 Q. And what was the corporate department?

8 A. Well, it -- it was departments so that

9 would be the Treasury, Human Resources, Account --

10 Accounting or the Controllers Office. The R and D

11 functions that were done at a corporate level rather

12 than departmental or business unit level.

13 Q. Right. Now, let's go back to 1988 to

14 the 2001 time frame.

15 What was your official title?

16 A. Well, I think I started as associate

17 general counsel and at some point I also became an

18 assistant secretary but I'm -- I got -- I have no --

19 no recollection of exactly when.

20 Q. And assistant secretary, do you mean to

21 the Board?

22 A. Well, as a -- to the corporation. You

23 know, it's a -- you know, it's a title. Assist...

24 Q. And how about from 2001 to 2006? What

25 was your official title?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 26 of 218 PageID:

43945
Page 26

1 A. I think it was the same.

2 Q. Okay. And from 1988 through the

3 duration of your time at Engelhard in 2006 who did you

4 report to?

5 A. It was Arthur Dornbusch the entire time.

6 Q. So he knew what you did?

7 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

8 A. In general, yes.

9 Q. Did you and Mr. Dornbusch have offices

10 in the same building?

11 A. Throughout that time we did I believe.

12 Q. And was that at the Engelhard

13 headquarters in Menlo Park?

14 A. Oh, I'm sorry. You know, there's one --

15 I'm not sure about one date and everything was always

16 in the Menlo Park area.

17 Q. Mm'mm.

18 A. For a time -- and it may have extended

19 past 1988 -- there was a separate corporate executive

20 suite of offices in a separate building and I was not

21 in that building.

22 Q. Okay.

23 A. Then at some point they sold that

24 building and the land around it and moved into a tall

25 building next to the -- what was then the Hilton Hotel

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 27 of 218 PageID:

43946
Page 27

1 on Wood Avenue and from that point on I was in the

2 same building as Arthur and that -- that's where we

3 were.

4 Q. And do you recall when Engelhard sold

5 that other executive building?

6 A. I'm not sure. It might have been after

7 1988.

8 Q. Late '80s, early '90s?

9 A. I -- I'm not -- I'm really not sure.

10 Q. That's fine.

11 And, Mr. Hassett, did there come a time

12 when you worked on the Emtal talc litigation?

13 A. Well, from the switch in my duties in

14 2001 until the -- just after the BASF acquisition.

15 Q. Okay.

16 A. 2 -- '01, late 01; whatever.

17 Q. But before 2001 you never did any work

18 on the Emtal talc litigation?

19 A. Not that I can recall.

20 Q. Pertaining to the Emtal talc litigation

21 what were your job responsibilities as assistant

22 associate general counsel -- well, I should say --

23 scratch that.

24 From 2001 to 2006 pertaining to the

25 Emtal talc litigation what were your job

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 28 of 218 PageID:

43947
Page 28

1 responsibilities as associate general counsel,

2 assistant secretary?

3 A. Well, the assistant secretary function

4 wasn't related but the --

5 Q. Okay.

6 A. -- for talc complaints in general the

7 tire workers cases were handled under a mechanism

8 where I had very limited responsibility. I would see

9 summary reports of some kind I think once in awhile

10 but I didn't get involved in seeing or responding to

11 complaints or anything.

12 For -- the few other talc cases we

13 learned of a -- you know, if a complaint came into the

14 company it would reach me and I would retain outside

15 counsel. You -- usually with advice from Cahill

16 Gordon on which counsel he'd select and coordinate the

17 response by the local counsel with information that

18 Cahill Gordon maintained for us.

19 Q. You're saying you were provided with

20 status reports of litigation. Who provided you with

21 those status reports?

22 A. On the tire workers litigation

23 information came from Cahill Gordon and more

24 specifically Mike Sullivan generally.

25 Q. Did you receive status reports on any

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 29 of 218 PageID:

43948
Page 29

1 other Emtal talc-related litigation?

2 A. I don't recall any, and on the tire

3 workers it was a settle -- like a settlement status

4 reports sort of thing. I -- it wasn't really the

5 details of the cases.

6 Q. Besides Michael Sullivan who else did

7 you speak with at Cahill Gordon in the context of

8 defending the Emtal talc litigation?

9 A. Peter Sloane, for a time Ira Dembrow was

10 involved for a little bit in Emtal talc and -- I know

11 it but it won't come -- there's another partner who

12 was involved in the talc litigation for a time and I

13 can't think of his name right now.

14 Q. Does Len Spivak sound familiar?

15 A. Yes. Len. Sorry. I know the name

16 well. It just wouldn't -- wouldn't come to me.

17 Q. Without disclosing specific

18 communications what were the nature of the

19 communications you had with personnel from Cahill

20 Gordon?

21 MR. BRESS: So, Mike, I'm going to -- I

22 think you can answer the topics generally that you

23 discussed but I think beyond that we would start

24 getting into some privileged issues.

25 MR. DONOHUE: Agreed.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 30 of 218 PageID:

43949
Page 30

1 A. So one topic was the referrals -- what

2 outside counsel to refer matters to locally and I --

3 you know, the system's already sort of up and running.

4 That's really the only specific thing I

5 can remember.

6 Q. What was your understanding of Cahill's

7 role in defending out Engelhard in the Emtal talc

8 litigation?

9 A. Well, my -- they were our national

10 counsel and I understood that they had a collection of

11 information relating to Emtal talc that really was the

12 company's only records left at this point. The -- the

13 business had been shut down and would -- would provide

14 that to local counsel as needed to respond to

15 complaints and they also had a more active role in

16 managing the tire workers cases and the settlements in

17 the tire workers cases.

18 Q. What do you mean by that; they had a

19 more active role in managing settlements in the tire

20 workers cases?

21 A. Well, the -- I don't even remember

22 seeing Complaints in the tire workers cases. I mean,

23 I think that they had some arrangement where service

24 went to either directly to local counsel or -- and

25 whatever information was exchanged with plaintiffs

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 31 of 218 PageID:

43950
Page 31

1 counsel they did on their own. They didn't -- I

2 didn't get involved in it.

3 Q. So I believe you said you did have a

4 role in retaining local defense counsel?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. What was the role -- what were the

7 responsibilities of the local defense counsel in

8 defending the Emtal litigation?

9 A. Well, depended on the nature and status

10 of the Complaint but local counsel would need to get

11 the information from Cahill Gordon and transmit it in

12 whatever form the proceedings required to the

13 plaintiffs counsel.

14 Q. Besides receiving the information from

15 Cahill and transmitting it to I guess the plaintiff do

16 you recall any other job responsibilities that local

17 defense counsel would have had as opposed to Cahill?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did you ever interact with the local

20 defense counsel?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Under what circumstances would you

23 interact with local defense counsel?

24 A. In general the initial engagement.

25 Anything to do with fees and it -- and I think other

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 32 of 218 PageID:

43951
Page 32

1 than that it was generally reactive.

2 Q. Reactive mean they reach out to you --

3 A. If --

4 Q. -- you answer --

5 A. If --

6 Q. -- any inquiries --

7 A. If they -- exactly. If they -- if they

8 reached out to me I would respond.

9 Q. So local counsel had direct access to

10 Engelhard internal Legal Department?

11 A. Local -- yes. The local counsel knew

12 who I was from the initial engagement and could call

13 me. In some cases they were counsel we had used on

14 nontalc matters and I knew them already.

15 Q. Which local defense counsel do you

16 recall interacting with?

17 A. Well, I knew Jack Kluznik who was

18 involved in the tire workers cases but I -- I don't

19 remember talking with him about anything other than

20 fees as to business.

21 I -- I knew him personally from a prior

22 job, too.

23 I knew Mel Bergstein's firm from other

24 litigation and I -- I knew Tony Paduano from other

25 litigation.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 33 of 218 PageID:

43952
Page 33

1 What was -- I'm sorry. What was the

2 question again?

3 Q. Which local counsel do you recall

4 interacting with?

5 A. I did react with Howard Merten.

6 That's all I can think of right now.

7 Q. I just want to nail down the

8 jurisdictions that they covered.

9 So Jack Kluznik covered Ohio?

10 A. I'm not sure.

11 Jack -- Jack -- Jack Kluznik was

12 involved in the tire workers cases and I think his

13 office was in Ohio but how the response -- I don't

14 know the details of the tire workers cases.

15 Q. Okay. How about Mel Bergstein's firm?

16 What jurisdictions were they responsible for?

17 A. Well, they -- we didn't have assigned

18 territories or anything like that. It was

19 case-by-case.

20 Mel's office was in New Jersey. He sort

21 of -- he had actually moved to different firms and

22 different offices within New Jersey over time. He --

23 he had done work for Engelhard for years but it wasn't

24 like he -- he had a specific territory or anything.

25 We would have sent him a New Jersey case.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 34 of 218 PageID:

43953
Page 34

1 Q. Right. Besides New Jersey cases do you

2 recall any other cases that Mel Bergstein's firm would

3 have -- well, that Mel Bergstein's firm handled?

4 A. Talc cases?

5 Q. Correct.

6 A. No.

7 Q. And I'm sorry. When I talk about your

8 interactions with your local defense counsel in the

9 talc cases --

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. -- so would you have interaction with

12 Mel Bergstein's firm in the context of New Jersey talc

13 cases?

14 A. I -- I don't really specifically

15 remember any interaction with Mel's firm on any talc

16 case.

17 I do remember interactions with Mel in

18 general but that's several litigations over many

19 years.

20 Q. One of the letters you looked at in

21 preparation for today was from Mel Bergstein's --

22 A. Yeah --

23 Q. -- firm, correct?

24 A. -- in fact, without that letter I never

25 would have remembered he did a talc case.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 35 of 218 PageID:

43954
Page 35

1 Q. Does that refresh your recollection that

2 he worked on the talc litigation?

3 A. Yeah.

4 Q. How about Tony Paduano? What -- in what

5 areas would Engelhard retain him for talc cases?

6 A. Well, as far as I recall Tony -- Tony's

7 firm --

8 Q. Mm'mm.

9 A. -- handled one talc case.

10 Q. And which case was that?

11 A. The Chernick case.

12 Q. And how about Howard Merten? What

13 juris -- well, what areas do you recall interacting?

14 A. Howard's firm --

15 Q. What cases?

16 A. -- was in Rhode Island and he -- as far

17 as I can recall Howard handled just one talc case for

18 Engelhard and I don't remember working with him on

19 anything else.

20 Q. And what was that one talc case?

21 A. The Martin case.

22 Q. What was the general division of labor

23 between Engelhard in-house counsel, Cahill Gordon and

24 the local defense counsel in defending the Emtal talc

25 litigation?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 36 of 218 PageID:

43955
Page 36

1 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

2 A. In general I would be the one -- in --

3 in general with the exception of the tire workers

4 cases. There weren't that many.

5 I don't -- it's...

6 The Complaint or letter, whatever, would

7 reach me. I would talk to Cahill about selection of a

8 local counsel and engage the counsel and explain to

9 them that Cahill had the relevant records and asked

10 them to respond -- you know, get in touch with Cahill

11 for information and respond accordingly, and at that

12 point my role would become responsive rather than

13 proactive until the -- the billing.

14 Q. And how about Cahill? What was their

15 general role after you passed off litigation?

16 A. Well, I wasn't -- I wasn't involved --

17 when -- local counsel could communicate directly with

18 Cahill. I -- I was not trying to stay involved in

19 every discussion so I don't always know the details.

20 Q. And either Cahill or local counsel would

21 then reach out to you when needed?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Can you tell me everybody that you

24 recall within the Engelhard Legal Department that

25 worked on the Emtal talc litigation?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 37 of 218 PageID:

43956
Page 37

1 A. Well --

2 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

3 A. Les Fliegel had that role before I did

4 and, you know, Arthur was involved at least as a

5 supervisor. You know, I don't know about the early

6 talc cases. I've heard Tom Halket's name in this

7 introduction. I know he was an Engelhard lawyer but

8 I -- I don't actually know his involvement in the talc

9 litigation.

10 And for in-house I don't know of anyone

11 else.

12 Q. Do you know what Les Fliegel's job

13 responsibilities were?

14 A. Well, at what point in time? Just in

15 relation to talc litigation?

16 Q. Relating to talc litigation.

17 A. I would say essentially the same as I

18 described for myself.

19 Q. And when you were speaking with Les

20 Fliegel in around 1988 when you were coming back to

21 Engelhard was he working on the talc litigation at

22 that time?

23 A. I don't know. I don't remember.

24 Oh, I'm sorry. I do...

25 If he was, he was brand new to it

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 38 of 218 PageID:

43957
Page 38

1 because the duties I took on when I went to Engelhard

2 were essentially replacing his old duties.

3 He -- he had been working for that

4 metals trading group.

5 Q. Mm'mm.

6 A. And was shifting out of that and that's

7 the job that I got assigned to when I went back.

8 Q. Do you recall any other Engelhard

9 in-house attorneys that worked on the Emtal talc

10 litigation?

11 A. I do not. Not that I -- there's -- you

12 know, I don't -- I don't have knowledge of every time

13 period but I don't know of any others.

14 Q. And from 2001 to 2006 besides yourself

15 and Arthur Dornbusch do you recall anybody else who's

16 working on the Em -- any other Engelhard in-house

17 attorneys that were working on the Emtal talc

18 litigation?

19 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

20 A. Well, that could be late -- my start

21 might have been late in '01 so earlier in '01 it could

22 have been Les.

23 Q. Okay.

24 A. But other than that I can't think of any

25 others.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 39 of 218 PageID:

43958
Page 39

1 Q. Do you know who took over the

2 responsibility in the Engelhard legal -- in-house

3 Legal Department of defending the Emtal talc

4 litigation after your role ended in around 2006-2007?

5 A. Yeah. Not long after the -- BASF

6 completed its acquisition of Engelhard all product

7 liability litigation was transferred to an in-house

8 BASF lawyer who was their products liability

9 specialist essentially, and I just -- her first name

10 was Maura. I don't remember her last name.

11 Q. Do you recall any -- which nonattorney

12 personnel from the Engelhard Legal Department worked

13 on the Emtal talc litigation?

14 A. From the Legal Department, you know, we

15 had I think one shared paralegal and shared

16 assistants.

17 I don't know what -- I'm not sure what

18 work they would have done on the talc cases honestly.

19 I don't remember anything specifically.

20 Q. Do you recall their names?

21 A. Well, I can remember the names of my

22 assistants when there was one or two lawyers per

23 assistant but by the time we got to thousand, 2001...

24 I can't think of them right now.

25 Q. I'm going to focus in a little bit more

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 40 of 218 PageID:

43959
Page 40

1 now on what your responsibilities were of the

2 Engelhard in-house lawyers' responsibilities were in

3 the Emtal talc litigation.

4 So I believe you said you reviewed

5 Complaints when they were filed against Engelhard. Is

6 that fair?

7 A. I received them. I didn't necessarily

8 review them carefully.

9 Q. Did you review Answers to Complaints

10 that were filed on behalf of Engelhard?

11 A. I don't recall specifically.

12 Q. Okay. Could those Answers have been

13 served without Engelhard's authorization?

14 MR. BRESS: Objection form.

15 MR. DONOHUE: Join.

16 A. I would be surprised if there wasn't

17 some form of authorization.

18 These were firms that we -- first, they

19 were reputable firms. These were firms we had often

20 worked with over previous cases and if they wanted to

21 work with us again it would be very surprising.

22 Q. Did you draft letters to opposing

23 counsel in the Emtal talc litigation?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Did you draft letters to Courts in the

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 41 of 218 PageID:

43960
Page 41

1 Emtal talc litigation?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Did you review any letters to plaintiffs

4 counsel or Courts before they were transmitted?

5 A. I don't recall.

6 Q. Would Engelhard lawyers have the

7 authority or authorization to transmit letters to

8 Courts without the client's authorization?

9 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

10 A. Generally I would say not without some

11 form of authorization. Not necessarily reviewing

12 specific clearance but some form of authorization.

13 Q. And same question for letters to

14 opposing counsel. Could Engelhard's lawyers transmit

15 letters to opposing counsel without some form of

16 Engelhard authorization?

17 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

18 A. I would say for the case of a letter, a

19 cover letter type of thing, the authorization might be

20 a very general one but there would still be some kind

21 of authorization.

22 Q. Did you review discovery requests

23 propounded on behalf of Engelhard?

24 A. Outgoing discovery --

25 Q. Outgoing.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 42 of 218 PageID:

43961
Page 42

1 A. -- requests in talc cases?

2 Q. Mm'mm.

3 A. I don't remember doing that.

4 Q. Would there need to be some form of

5 authorization from Engelhard before an Engelhard

6 attorney representing Engelhard could propound

7 discovery requests?

8 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form and

9 foundation.

10 A. You know, I want to go back to what I

11 said about general authorizations on the letters.

12 I think there's some -- if we engaged

13 counsel and the routine thing to do was to send out a

14 relatively standard discovery request I'm not sure

15 that anything more than the engagement would have been

16 needed to authorize it.

17 I -- I just -- I don't remember doing

18 anything on outgoing discovery requests, authorization

19 or review or anything else.

20 Q. How about incoming discovery requests?

21 Did you participate in answering discovery requests on

22 behalf of Engelhard?

23 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

24 A. On talc litigation where the -- there

25 was no new information or files, my participation was

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 43 of 218 PageID:

43962
Page 43

1 limited to steering the local counsel to Cahill Gordon

2 to get the -- to get the information needed to

3 respond.

4 Other types of litigation, different

5 story.

6 Q. So in your role in answering discovery

7 requests would you talk to any former employees?

8 A. On talc litigation --

9 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

10 THE WITNESS: Sorry.

11 A. On talc litigation I don't recall

12 talking to former employees.

13 Q. Did you talk to any current employees in

14 answering discovery requests in the talc litigation?

15 A. On talc litigation I don't recall

16 talking to current employees -- then-current

17 employees.

18 Q. In answering discovery requests on

19 behalf of Engelhard in the talc litigation would you

20 review any files?

21 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

22 A. On talc litigation I don't recall

23 reviewing any files.

24 Q. Would you review Answers to discovery

25 before they were served in the talc litigation?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 44 of 218 PageID:

43963
Page 44

1 A. I don't recall.

2 Q. Could Answers to discovery requests be

3 served without Engelhard's authorization?

4 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

5 MR. DONOHUE: Join.

6 A. I think at least a general authorization

7 would have been normal.

8 Q. Where did the factual information

9 contained in the Answers to discovery requests come

10 from?

11 A. For talc litigation?

12 Q. For talc litigation?

13 A. I believe it came from the records

14 maintained at Cahill Gordon.

15 Q. And where did Cahill get those records

16 from?

17 A. I wasn't involved in -- I could -- I

18 could guess but...

19 Q. They were Engelhard's records, correct?

20 A. Yes.

21 MR. BRESS: Objection.

22 Q. Besides Engelhard's records that were

23 maintained at Cahill Gordon where else did the factual

24 information responsive to discovery requests come

25 from?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 45 of 218 PageID:

43964
Page 45

1 A. For talc --

2 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

3 Q. For talc litigation.

4 A. For talc litigation I don't recall any

5 other source -- I don't recall any other source of

6 information.

7 Q. Did you ever review transcripts of

8 depositions taken in the talc litigation?

9 A. I did not.

10 Q. Did you ever attend depositions taken in

11 the Em -- in the talc litigation?

12 A. I did not.

13 Q. Did you participate or did your office

14 participate in drafting motions for Summary Judgment

15 in the talc litigation?

16 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

17 A. I don't recall drafting or participating

18 in any talc motion for Summary Judgment.

19 Q. Would you or your office review motions

20 for Summary Judgment before they were filed in the

21 talc litigation?

22 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

23 A. I don't recall participating in drafting

24 or reviewing any motion for Summary Judgment.

25 Q. Did Engelhard's lawyers have the

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 46 of 218 PageID:

43965
Page 46

1 authority to file motions for a Summary Judgment

2 without some form of authorization from Engelhard?

3 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

4 MR. DONOHUE: Join.

5 A. Well, I don't -- if we talk about

6 litigation in general I would say there would be some

7 sort of authorization. If we talk just about talc

8 litigation I don't remember motions for Summary

9 Judgment so I don't have a procedure to...

10 Q. That's fine.

11 And I wanted to ask one other question

12 about the status reports you received regarding the

13 talc litigation.

14 A. On tire worker settlements -- status

15 reports on tire worker settlements?

16 Q. Mm'mm.

17 A. Is that what we're talking about?

18 Q. Yeah. Is -- is that the only status

19 reports that you recall?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And besides settlement information is

22 there any other topics covered in the status reports?

23 A. Well --

24 MR. BRESS: Mike, you can answer that I

25 think at a high level but be careful not to disclose

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 47 of 218 PageID:

43966
Page 47

1 privileged information.

2 A. You know, the reports were -- that I --

3 I don't remember the -- them well, first of all.

4 Q. Mm'mm.

5 A. They included some quantitative

6 information on the settlements and they may have

7 included some --

8 MR. BRESS: Mike, I think this is now

9 getting to be too detailed so if you want I can talk

10 to the witness about it but I think this is getting

11 too deep into the privilege.

12 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: If you want to.

13 I'm just trying to separate topics but if you need to

14 talk to a witness --

15 MR. BRESS: So you can talk --

16 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: -- that's no

17 problem.

18 MR. BRESS: -- about general topics but

19 I think where we're starting to go is too detailed and

20 is getting close to revealing privileged information

21 which I instruct you not to do.

22 A. Well, the -- the general topic of these

23 reports that I vaguely remember was the -- to -- to

24 keep the company updated on the status of settlements

25 in the tire workers litigation and I would add again

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 48 of 218 PageID:

43967
Page 48

1 just as a general -- they did not include details of

2 any of -- any particular case.

3 Q. Without disclosing specific information

4 did these status reports have the reasons why cases

5 were settled?

6 MR. BRESS: I'm going to instruct you

7 not to answer that, Mike, unless I -- can you read

8 back the question, again.

9 (Last question read back by the

10 reporter.)

11 MR. BRESS: Yeah. I think you're

12 starting to get into the content of the communication

13 so maybe there's a way to reframe the question.

14 Mike, if you're -- if you're able to

15 answer that without disclosing privileged information

16 you can let us know.

17 A. Well, I don't want to decipher myself

18 what's privileged on this one. We could have a short

19 conversation outside the room if you want.

20 MR. DONOHUE: Can -- if I might.

21 Can you answer it with a yes or no

22 question (sic)? Did the communication indicate --

23 THE WITNESS: I -- I -- close enough.

24 A. I can say that I don't recall anything

25 about reasons for settlement.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 49 of 218 PageID:

43968
Page 49

1 Q. In the context of the Emtal talc

2 litigation did you interact with Engelhard's insurance

3 carriers?

4 A. In general, no. There's one possible

5 exception.

6 Q. And what's that one possible exception?

7 A. I -- we -- we did look into insurance in

8 the Martin case and I don't -- I don't remember

9 whether I interacted directly with the carrier or not

10 and I'm also not even positive it was Engelhard's

11 carrier. It might have been the distributor's

12 carrier.

13 Q. Well, what do you recall about the

14 nature of those interactions in the context with

15 insurance carriers in the Martin case?

16 MR. BRESS: Well, are you asking him to

17 disclose communications with carriers or...

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: First, just

19 topics.

20 MR. BRESS: I need to -- I need to talk

21 to the witness outside.

22 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

23 All right. Take a quick break.

24 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:21

25 a.m. We're off the record.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 50 of 218 PageID:

43969
Page 50

1 (At this time the witness and counsel

2 leave the deposition room at 11:21 a.m.)

3 MR. DONOHUE: Everybody's there on the

4 phone, right?

5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is --

6 MR. TUNIS: Yes.

7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: -- 11:28 a.m. We're

8 on the record.

9 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

10 Q. So, Mr. Hassett, before we took a short

11 break I believe my last question was what were the

12 nature of the interactions that you had with insurance

13 carriers in the context of the Martin case?

14 MR. BRESS: And I'll instruct you not

15 to -- go ahead. I think you can give the answer.

16 A. We were inquiring into coverage issues.

17 Q. And what were those coverage issues?

18 MR. BRESS: Well, I don't -- I don't

19 know if you know the answer to that but -- but I'm

20 not -- I'm going to ask you and instruct you not to

21 reveal specific communications.

22 THE WITNESS: Well, first I think to the

23 extent that I discussed that, it was with the local

24 counsel and not -- that part of it at least was not

25 directly with the carrier so that -- does that change

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 51 of 218 PageID:

43970
Page 51

1 your view on the...

2 MR. BRESS: Oh, yes. I do instruct you

3 not to disclose communications with local counsel on

4 the basis of privilege.

5 Q. But for the instruction not to answer

6 would you be able to answer that question?

7 A. Only in an extremely general way.

8 Q. But yes?

9 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

10 A. I could give a very general answer, yes.

11 Q. In the context of the Emtal talc

12 litigation did you have any interactions with

13 insurance brokers?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Did Engelhard set budgets on attorneys

16 fees and expenses in individual matters?

17 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

18 A. In general, no. I don't remember an

19 exception I was involved in.

20 Q. Do you know approximately how much it

21 cost Engelhard to defend an Emtal talc case?

22 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

23 A. And I -- I don't know there was a

24 typical case you could answer based on. I don't

25 really remember much of anything about the fee numbers

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 52 of 218 PageID:

43971
Page 52

1 at this point.

2 Q. Instead of a typical number how about --

3 let's take two cases.

4 You said the Chernick case.

5 Do you recall how much it cost Engelhard

6 to defend the Chernick case?

7 A. I don't remember.

8 Q. And do you recall how much it cost

9 Engelhard to defend the Martin case?

10 A. I do not remember.

11 Q. Did Engelhard keep records of how much

12 it cost it to defend Emtal talc cases?

13 A. The company in general maintained

14 records of legal expenses and all expenses. It's, you

15 know, a big company with good financial statements.

16 I don't recall seeing reports that were

17 specific to -- specific breakdowns for talc cases

18 or -- and -- and certainly didn't ask for them.

19 Q. If those records existed who would --

20 what department in Engelhard would be responsible for

21 maintaining them?

22 MR. BRESS: Objection. Foundation.

23 THE WITNESS: Answer anyway?

24 MR. DONOHUE: You may answer.

25 A. Well, accounting would have records on

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 53 of 218 PageID:

43972
Page 53

1 expenses generally including legal fees and I don't

2 know if there would be any supplemental reports

3 that -- you know, that Arthur saw but I didn't.

4 Q. Have you ever attended any seminars

5 pertaining to the defense of asbestos or talc cases?

6 A. No.

7 Q. What role did Engelhard's Legal

8 Department have in deciding whether to settle a talc

9 case?

10 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

11 A. In general a settlement would be

12 approved by the in-house Legal Department.

13 The tire worker cases I just didn't get

14 involved -- I'm not sure what the approval -- tire

15 workers were different. Not sure what the approval

16 process was exactly there.

17 Q. Who in the Engelhard Legal Department

18 approved settlements? Would that be Arthur Dornbusch?

19 A. In general, yes.

20 Q. I'd like to go back to the tire workers

21 cases for a minute.

22 Do you recall what tire worker cases,

23 you know, were within your purview?

24 A. Well, I would -- in theory, all. In

25 practice, none. I -- I -- I just...

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 54 of 218 PageID:

43973
Page 54

1 Cahill had an effective system set up

2 and I didn't really do anything that I can recall

3 other than see these periodic reports we mentioned

4 earlier, and I think I spoke with Jack Kluznik on a

5 couple of billing issues, and that's all I can

6 remember doing personally on the tire worker cases.

7 Q. And so I understand, what do you mean

8 but -- when you say tire worker cases? What cases --

9 what realm of cases are encompassed in tire worker

10 cases?

11 A. Well, there was a -- I don't know it was

12 a class action.

13 There's a -- there were many cases. I'm

14 not -- I'm not sure if they were -- some of them were

15 class actions or just a bunch of individual plaintiff

16 cases brought in the -- brought in Ohio with -- many

17 of the plaintiffs were represented by a few law firms

18 that would appear as plaintiffs counsel in -- in

19 multiple actions and there were also multiple

20 defendants and the parties or -- to some extent the

21 counsel had a -- repetitive relationships and had

22 formed kind of a settlement procedure is my

23 understanding.

24 Q. What's your understanding of the

25 settlement procedure?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 55 of 218 PageID:

43974
Page 55

1 A. I don't know that much about it. You

2 know, I never -- never met or spoke with any of the

3 plaintiffs counsel. I didn't give any instructions to

4 Cahill or Mike Sullivan --

5 MR. BRESS: Mike, just be careful what

6 your -- I don't want you to --

7 THE WITNESS: All right.

8 A. My short answer is that my understanding

9 is very limited. You pretty -- you pretty much have

10 heard my understanding.

11 Q. Who would know about the settlement

12 procedures in the tire worker litigation?

13 A. Our -- our reports came from Mike

14 Sullivan.

15 Q. All right. And Michael Sullivan was a

16 paralegal, correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. What attorneys would know about the

19 settlement procedures?

20 A. Well, I -- I -- I think that at

21 different times Peter Sloane and Ira and Len would

22 have been probably technically responsible.

23 Q. I believe you said that the

24 authorization to settle a case had to come from

25 Engelhard, correct?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 56 of 218 PageID:

43975
Page 56

1 A. I think I said --

2 MR. BRESS: Wait.

3 THE WITNESS: Okay.

4 Q. From Engelhard's Legal Department.

5 A. I think I said --

6 MR. BRESS: Hold on. Hold on.

7 THE WITNESS: Okay.

8 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

9 A. And I -- I said in general that's true

10 but the tire worker cases might be something of an

11 exception.

12 Q. Was -- how about the decision -- I mean

13 the amount to settle for? Was that also up to

14 Engelhard in the talc litigation?

15 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

16 MR. DONOHUE: Are you separating out

17 talc litigation versus tire worker --

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

19 MR. DONOHUE: -- subset?

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: We'll ask that

21 question first.

22 MR. DONOHUE: Okay. So general?

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: General, right.

24 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

25 A. In talc litigation generally but not

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 57 of 218 PageID:

43976
Page 57

1 tire worker, the decision to seek settlement or

2 whatever and the amount would be approved by the Legal

3 Department generally.

4 Q. And in the tire worker litigation the

5 decision of the amount to settle for was that -- had

6 to be authorized by the Legal Department?

7 A. There's a process there. I'm just not

8 as familiar with it. I don't know the answer to that.

9 Q. By "process" do you mean agreements with

10 other defendants?

11 A. H'mm.

12 I don't -- I don't know the answer to

13 that.

14 Q. And who would know the answer to that?

15 A. Well, I think the same group at Cahill

16 that we mentioned would know for different times.

17 Q. Mm'mm.

18 A. I think Arthur would probably know.

19 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Could we go off

20 the record for one second.

21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:41 a.m.

22 Off the record.

23 (Discussion off the record.)

24 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:44 a.m.

25 We're on the record.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 58 of 218 PageID:

43977
Page 58

1 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

2 Q. So, Mr. Hassett, I'm showing you what's

3 been marked as Exhibit Hassett-5 for identification.

4 It is two letters; an August 20, 2002, letter from a

5 SherryLynn to a Michael Sullivan copying Sam

6 Martillotta, and if you scroll, the second letter is a

7 letter from Sherry --

8 THE WITNESS: Would --

9 Q. -- Lynn to Michael --

10 THE WITNESS: Would it be all right if I

11 worked with a hard copy?

12 MR. BRESS: The hard copy?

13 MR. DONOHUE: Use mine.

14 MR. BRESS: You can -- he can use mine.

15 Yeah.

16 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: That's fine.

17 (Pause.)

18 A. I skimmed through it at least.

19 Q. Have you ever seen this document before?

20 MR. BRESS: And just so you know -- you

21 heard this. This is two separate letters that have

22 been combined together as one exhibit.

23 A. And I don't recall specifically seeing

24 either one of these letters before although I do note

25 I'm cc'd on one of them.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 59 of 218 PageID:

43978
Page 59

1 Q. Would this be one of the settlement

2 procedures that you were describing in the tire worker

3 cases?

4 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

5 A. I would say no.

6 The summaries I was talking about were

7 prepared for Engelhard as opposed to being a copy of a

8 letter written to a third party.

9 Q. And do you see that in both letters

10 there are about 300 cases that are settled for around

11 a thousand dollars each give or take a few?

12 A. Well, I noticed that in the first letter.

13 The second one seems to be mostly about

14 trying to make sure the lists aren't duplicates and

15 whatnot.

16 Q. Right. And you see -- if you turn to

17 Bates number 39045 it is the second to last page of

18 the second letter.

19 A. The second to the last page of the whole

20 package?

21 Q. Mm'mm. Yeah.

22 A. 5-9?

23 Q. Yes.

24 A. Okay. I'm with you.

25 Q. And you see in the first paragraph

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 60 of 218 PageID:

43979
Page 60

1 starting with "Accordingly"?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. "The above-referenced plaintiffs should

4 be included in the current settlement which increases

5 the total amount of 309 or 310,000 including William

6 Turner"?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And if you review the rest of these

9 documents you see that on average the cases are

10 settled for a thousand dollars as the settlement

11 amount either goes up or go down by a thousand

12 depending on how many people are in the settlement?

13 A. Well, is that --

14 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

15 A. Yeah. I see -- is -- my understanding

16 was that that thousand was Engelhard's contribution.

17 Is that -- is that all defendants?

18 Q. Well, I'm reading on the second -- the

19 paragraph below that. It says, "Please call me

20 directly" -- sorry. Second to last page.

21 Michael Sullivan saying to SherryLynn of

22 Bevan and Associates.

23 He says, "Please call me directly if you

24 have any questions" --

25 A. Right.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 61 of 218 PageID:

43980
Page 61

1 Q. -- "otherwise" --

2 A. Okay. So that -- all I'm --

3 MR. BRESS: Hold it. Let's -- what's

4 the question?

5 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

6 Q. It says, "I look forward to hearing from

7 you with respect to the above issues at your

8 convenience in order to finalize the settlement with

9 the talc defendants."

10 And then the copy is Talc Defense

11 Counsel.

12 So would this be a settlement agreement

13 between Bevan and the talc defense counsel?

14 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

15 Q. Or talc defendants?

16 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

17 A. Yeah. My answer is pretty simple

18 anyway. I don't know.

19 Q. Okay. Do you know who the talc defense

20 counsel were?

21 A. No. All I know is -- all I know about

22 that is the specific that Cahill Gordon and local

23 counsel which I guess varied over time were involved

24 in defending Engelhard. As to counsel or the other

25 defendants, don't know anything.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 62 of 218 PageID:

43981
Page 62

1 Q. So do you recall having any interactions

2 with the talc defense counsel?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Okay. Do you know how it was determined

5 how much Engelhard was going to pay in this settlement

6 with talc defendants?

7 A. I do not and I -- you know, I'm not -- I

8 still am not sure whether that was Engelhard's

9 contribution or the counsel as a whole honestly from

10 the --

11 Q. Mm'mm.

12 A. -- letter but my -- my answer is I don't

13 know.

14 Q. Do you know who would know how -- what

15 Engelhard paid in a group settlement with talc

16 defendants?

17 A. Well, I think --

18 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Fix your microphone,

19 sir.

20 THE WITNESS: Where'd it go? See if I

21 can get it on better.

22 (Pause.)

23 MR. BRESS: Can you repeat the question?

24 A. Who would --

25 Q. Sure.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 63 of 218 PageID:

43982
Page 63

1 A. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

2 Q. Sure.

3 Mr. Hassett, do you know who would know

4 what Engelhard or how Engelhard determined what it was

5 going to pay in a group settlement with other talc

6 defendants?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Would it be Arthur Dornbusch?

9 A. It was -- I think Arthur would be aware

10 of it in a general way --

11 Q. Mm'mm.

12 A. -- but I'm not sure about the specifics

13 of anything that -- you know, I'm not sure about the

14 specifics of any given settlement.

15 Q. Before we leave this document I want to

16 turn you back to the first letter beginning on the

17 second page. It looks like it's the attachment. It

18 says Page 1 of 8 on 447.

19 A. I'm with you.

20 Q. And that goes through Bates 454.

21 A. Okay.

22 Q. Are you aware that the names on these

23 lists include both plaintiffs that were claiming

24 mal -- you know, suffering from malignant diseases and

25 nonmalignant diseases as a result of exposure to Emtal

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 64 of 218 PageID:

43983
Page 64

1 talc?

2 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

3 A. I don't remember this letter at all and

4 the first part I'm not sure if I've seen before today.

5 Q. Mm'mm.

6 A. I -- I don't know anything about this

7 specific group of plaintiffs and the injuries they

8 allege.

9 Q. Do you know if Engelhard ever

10 distinguished between malignant and nonmalignant

11 claims in deciding to settle in group settlements such

12 as this?

13 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

14 A. You know, I could surmise that more

15 severe injury claims would justify a larger settlement

16 but I don't really know the process. I don't have any

17 recollection of it. I don't think I knew the details

18 at the time.

19 Q. Did --

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I think I'm done

21 with that document.

22 Q. Did Engelhard keep records of the

23 disposition of each Emtal talc case?

24 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

25 A. Well, for the tire worker cases I don't

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 65 of 218 PageID:

43984
Page 65

1 know if we had any records at the company other than

2 whatever reports Mike provided and probably some

3 accounting and records of payments.

4 For nontire worker talc cases, you know,

5 you'd have correspondence files like the -- the couple

6 of letters I saw in my prep yesterday that we

7 mentioned. They would have gone into a file and

8 stayed for at least the period in the record retention

9 policy.

10 To the extent there were any Pleadings

11 that reached the Legal Department. Same sort of

12 thing. They would have gone into a file and stayed

13 around for awhile.

14 Q. Mm'mm.

15 A. But I don't remember the specifics of

16 the retention policy or the file on the cases I

17 handled.

18 Q. In general did the records you reviewed

19 yesterday refresh your recollection?

20 MR. BRESS: Object to the form.

21 A. Okay. So the two cover letter-type

22 things were unfamiliar to me when I first saw them.

23 Q. Mm'mm.

24 A. After looking at one of them for a

25 minute I realized it was Mel Bergstein's firm because

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 66 of 218 PageID:

43985
Page 66

1 I saw his name on the letterhead and a little bit of

2 it came back to me.

3 The other cover letter-type thing I

4 really didn't have much recollection of even after

5 seeing the letter.

6 Q. Mm'mm.

7 A. The record retention policy I had an

8 extremely vague recollection of. I mean, I knew --

9 certainly I knew clearly that it existed but the

10 specifics of it I -- I didn't remember.

11 The Chernick Interrogatory responses,

12 again, I -- I knew it existed. I didn't have a

13 specific recollection of it without the -- the more

14 recent look at it.

15 Q. All right.

16 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Tim, at a break

17 can we get a copy of those documents? Or Dan?

18 MR. BRESS: They've been provided to

19 you.

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Can you let me

21 know what the Bates stamps are? So I know

22 specifically what he was looking at.

23 I don't know which letter, you know, Mel

24 Bergstein's firm was so at a break if you could just

25 pull those up and send those?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 67 of 218 PageID:

43986
Page 67

1 MR. BRESS: They should be obvious but

2 we'll look in -- we'll -- we'll think about it.

3 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Thank you.

4 Q. And the records we were just discussing

5 about, what cases settled for, you said there were

6 tire worker records. And there were other records?

7 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

8 A. Yes. For nontire worker cases there

9 would have been in some cases at least correspondence

10 and in some cases maybe a Pleading.

11 Q. All right. Well, records specifically

12 what cases settled for, those had to be shared with

13 your carriers, correct?

14 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

15 A. That may be true but I was not involved

16 in making the claim to the carrier and I don't know

17 how it was documented.

18 Q. Who would have -- well, who would know

19 that how claims were made to the insurance carrier?

20 A. Well, the company had an insurance

21 department actually which was a small -- very small --

22 Q. Mm'mm.

23 A. -- group at -- at times as few as one,

24 but the -- I don't know if they were involved in

25 making claims on the talc or tire worker cases.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 68 of 218 PageID:

43987
Page 68

1 I -- I don't know.

2 Q. Did Accounting keep records of case

3 settlements and amounts --

4 MR. BRESS: Objection.

5 Q. -- in the talc litigation?

6 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

7 A. My understanding is that accounting had

8 some kind of record of payments generally for all

9 purposes, not just legal settlements. Whether they

10 did a break-out or, you know, a printout or special

11 break-out on talc case expenses or talc case

12 settlements, I don't know.

13 Q. Have you ever seen any talc litigation

14 indexes?

15 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

16 A. I don't -- I mean, I know in general

17 what an index is.

18 Q. Mm'mm.

19 A. I don't remember seeing anything I would

20 characterize as a -- a talc litigation index.

21 Q. Well, let me ask you a question about

22 something.

23 MR. DONOHUE: Thank you.

24 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

25 Tony?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 69 of 218 PageID:

43988
Page 69

1 MR. VALE: Thank you.

2 A. All right. So do I need to go through

3 this?

4 Q. No. I'll --

5 MR. DONOHUE: There's no question

6 pending.

7 A. Okay.

8 Q. So, Mr. Hassett, in front of you is what

9 I've marked as Exhibit Hassett-11. It's excerpts from

10 BASF privilege log in this case that we created, and I

11 want to direct your attention on Page 5.

12 A. Okay.

13 Q. The first entry, it says privilege,

14 1210. So 4/12/2002 document. Do you see that?

15 A. The first entry?

16 Q. Yeah.

17 A. 4/12 of '02.

18 Q. Right.

19 A. Yes?

20 Q. And it's from Michael Sullivan to Arthur

21 Dornbusch, yourself and Peter Sloane. Do you see

22 that?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And it says, "A letter attaching index

25 containing mental impressions of counsel regarding

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 70 of 218 PageID:

43989
Page 70

1 talc litigations."

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you know what these indexes are of

4 talc litigations are?

5 MR. BRESS: I think that's just a yes or

6 no, Mike.

7 A. And I don't remember this at all. I

8 don't know what this is. Mental -- I don't remember it.

9 Q. Do you recall any other -- any type of

10 talc indexes?

11 A. No. The only -- the only thing I could

12 tell you is that I talked earlier about a summary

13 report kind of thing.

14 Q. Mm'mm.

15 A. It's possible that's the same thing. I

16 would not think of that as an index personally but...

17 Q. Okay. And I think I asked this but I

18 want to make sure.

19 Do you recall how often you received

20 those reports?

21 A. I do not.

22 Q. Based on your experience with the Emtal

23 talc litigation do you understand that without

24 evidence that a product contains asbestos a plaintiff

25 cannot prove a claim alleging asbestos disease from

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 71 of 218 PageID:

43990
Page 71

1 that product?

2 MR. BRESS: Objection.

3 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form of the

4 question. You can answer.

5 MR. BRESS: Join.

6 A. Could -- could you repeat that, please?

7 Q. Sure.

8 Based on your experience in the Emtal

9 talc litigation do you understand that without

10 evidence that a product contains asbestos that a

11 plaintiff cannot prove a claim alleging asbestos

12 disease from that product?

13 MR. BRESS: Object to form.

14 A. Well, I think I may have understood that

15 as a matter of general rules of causation. I'm not

16 sure if I learned it in my connection with the

17 Engelhard talc litigation.

18 Q. But generally you understand that to be

19 true?

20 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

21 MR. DONOHUE: Same objection.

22 A. General -- in most cases at least -- in

23 almost all cases that would seem to be a correct

24 statement of the law to me.

25 (Pause.)

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 72 of 218 PageID:

43991
Page 72

1 MR. VALE: Thank you.

2 Q. Mr. Hassett, in front of you is what

3 I've marked as Exhibit 203 for identification. It's

4 defendant Arthur Dornbusch's Rule 26 Disclosures in

5 this action, Williams versus BASF Catalysts.

6 Have you ever seen this document before

7 the today?

8 A. No. In fact, I might need a primer on

9 Rule 26.

10 Q. Well --

11 MR. VALE: Probably everybody else.

12 Q. Well, if we take it to the second page

13 Mr. Dornbusch identifies -- under Section A Mr.

14 Dornbusch identifies witnesses that may have

15 discoverable information in this lawsuit.

16 Do you see that?

17 A. Discoverable information. I got it.

18 Q. Right. And I want to turn to the

19 seventh page.

20 A. Okay.

21 Q. And do you see your name listed, Michael

22 J. Hassett --

23 A. Yes --

24 Q. -- Esquire?

25 A. -- I do.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 73 of 218 PageID:

43992
Page 73

1 Q. And it says Potential Areas of Knowledge.

2 You see the top column?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. All right. And it says, "Engelhard BASF

5 legal defenses and actions in various asbestos-related

6 litigations, tests and/or inspections of the mine in

7 Johnson, Vermont, asbestos tests and/or studies of

8 Engelhard's BASF talc and the retention of records and

9 documents related to Engelhard BASF talc and

10 asbestos-related litigation."

11 Do you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And this is from Arthur Dornbusch.

14 You said before he generally knew what

15 you did. You reported to him. Is that fair?

16 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. I want to go through each of these four

19 categories and we'll take them one at a time.

20 So Mr. Dornbusch says that you have

21 knowledge about "Engelhard/BASF legal defenses and

22 actions in various asbestos-related litigations."

23 What do you know about that?

24 A. Well, for talc we were talking about

25 tire workers as -- and I -- and I think you asked me

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 74 of 218 PageID:

43993
Page 74

1 to describe those cases. I forgot to mention the

2 plaintiff plaintiffs were, in fact, tire workers to

3 state the obvious, but for the tire worker cases I

4 can't really add much to what we've already discussed

5 probably.

6 For nontire worker talc cases we would

7 periodically receive a complaint, small -- you know,

8 over the years I was in that job it might have been

9 one a year, possibly even less. It wasn't a big part

10 of the job or -- and -- and I guess a -- you know,

11 formal -- sometimes I think things might be initiated

12 with a letter rather than a formal Complaint, and I

13 was -- well, again, it's the same thing we talked

14 about earlier.

15 I had to arrange defense -- local

16 defense counsel which was a referral for Cahill and

17 try to make sure they had access to the information

18 that Cahill had collected previously.

19 I'm not -- what else do you want to know

20 in this first category?

21 Maybe a more specific question would be

22 helpful. I feel I'm just going to be repeating

23 everything we've discussed.

24 Q. Sure. Maybe we could follow up on

25 something we talked about earlier and interactions

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 75 of 218 PageID:

43994
Page 75

1 with local counsel.

2 Did Engelhard provide any kind of

3 briefing book or materials to local counsel to get

4 them up to speed on the litigation?

5 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

6 A. Not directly.

7 Q. What do you mean by that?

8 A. I understood Cahill had materials. I --

9 I didn't have them.

10 Q. Do you know what materials Cahill

11 provided to local counsel?

12 A. I never reviewed the package that are

13 more recently.

14 Q. You understood it to be a package,

15 though, of materials?

16 A. Yeah. A pack -- I just used the term

17 "package," but it wasn't with a -- you know, I don't

18 knowing if it was a three-ring binder. I really don't

19 know.

20 Q. Okay. I'm assuming that attorneys from

21 Cahill may know what they provided?

22 A. I would probably make the same

23 assumption --

24 Q. Okay.

25 A. -- but...

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 76 of 218 PageID:

43995
Page 76

1 Q. Well, are you aware that in defending

2 Emtal talc litigations Engelhard's lawyers asserted

3 that there was no asbestos in Emtal talc?

4 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

5 MR. DONOHUE: Yeah. Just to clarify,

6 you're referring to outside lawyers?

7 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Outside lawyers.

8 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

9 A. My -- my understanding was that the

10 materials that Cahill had included tests and other

11 materials that showed Engelhard's -- Engelhard's talc

12 was harmless, asbestos-free.

13 Q. And do you know where those materials

14 came from?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Besides those materials do you know what

17 the factual basis was for that assertion that there

18 was no asbestos in Emtal talc?

19 MR. BRESS: So to the extent you would

20 have to divulge privileged information to answer that

21 question I have to instruct you not to answer.

22 If you can answer that question without

23 divulging privileged information you can do so.

24 THE WITNESS: I -- well, especially

25 since I want to use the men's room anyway could we

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 77 of 218 PageID:

43996
Page 77

1 take a short -- a very short break?

2 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

3 Absolutely.

4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Time is 12:13 p.m.

5 We're off the record.

6 (Recess taken at 12:13 p.m.)

7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:24 p.m.

8 We're on the record.

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: All right. And,

10 Mr. Hassett, before we took a break I believe I had a

11 question pending.

12 Pat, can you read it back for us, please.

13 (The following question is read back by

14 the reporter:

15 "Question: Besides those materials do

16 you know what the factual basis was for that assertion

17 that there was no asbestos in Emtal talc?")

18 MR. BRESS: And I will give you the same

19 instruction which is that you can answer to the extent

20 you're not revealing privileged information but to the

21 extent you would reveal privileged information I would

22 instruct you not to answer.

23 A. I -- I can't provide any answer without --

24 without including privileged information.

25 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: So, Dan, my

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 78 of 218 PageID:

43997
Page 78

1 question calls for factual basis. Not legal advice or

2 communications.

3 Is that still your instruction for him

4 not to answer what the factual basis for the assertion

5 that there was no asbestos in Emtal talc?

6 MR. BRESS: So he's testified that he

7 was aware of materials that Cahill had.

8 You asked a question and I told him that

9 he could answer to the extent that doing so would not

10 reveal privileged information.

11 I understood his answer to be that he

12 could not.

13 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay.

14 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

15 Q. So, Mr. Hassett, but for the instruction

16 not to answer you would be able to tell me besides the

17 materials that were provided to local counsel what

18 were the factual basis for the assertion by Engelhard

19 attorneys that there was no asbestos in Emtal talc --

20 MR. BRESS: Object --

21 Q. -- is that correct?

22 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

23 MR. DONOHUE: And in order to protect

24 the privilege I'm just going to instruct him to answer

25 yes or no to that.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 79 of 218 PageID:

43998
Page 79

1 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yeah.

2 Absolutely.

3 THE WITNESS: I'm -- I'm sorry. Could

4 you give me the question one more time?

5 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

6 Pat, do you -- thanks.

7 (The following question is read back by

8 the reporter:

9 "Question: So, Mr. Hassett, but for the

10 instruction not to answer you would be able to tell me

11 besides the materials that were provided to local

12 counsel what were the factual basis for the assertion

13 by Engelhard attorneys that there was no asbestos in

14 Emtal talc. Is that correct?")

15 MR. BRESS: Do you understand the

16 question?

17 THE WITNESS: I -- I'm not sure if I do,

18 honestly.

19 Q. Sure. How about then -- how about just

20 this then?

21 Can you provide me all factual basis for

22 the assertion that there is no asbestos in Emtal talc?

23 MR. BRESS: So to the extent you know

24 the answer to this you can provide it but you -- to

25 the extent it would require you to reveal privileged

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 80 of 218 PageID:

43999
Page 80

1 communications I would instruct you not to answer.

2 A. I don't think I have any factual basis

3 other than through privileged communications. I...

4 Q. Okay.

5 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: And it's BASF's

6 position that the facts contained in those privileged

7 communications are not disclosable?

8 MR. BRESS: Well, you're not asking

9 about facts.

10 He's -- he's saying that to answer the

11 question as you framed it he would have to disclose

12 privileged information so perhaps there's a different

13 way of framing the question that wouldn't lead to that

14 instruction of that answer.

15 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

16 Q. Without divulging legal advice or

17 privileged communications can you give me what the

18 factual basis is for the assertion that there's no

19 asbestos in Emtal talc?

20 A. I think the answer to that is no.

21 Q. Okay. Did Engelhard -- did Engelhard

22 authorize its attorneys to assert there's no asbestos

23 in Emtal talc?

24 MR. BRESS: Objection to form. I think

25 that's calling for a privileged communication.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 81 of 218 PageID:

44000
Page 81

1 Q. That's a yes or no.

2 MR. BRESS: Well, you're asking did

3 someone authorize. That's asking about the content --

4 Q. Did Engelhard authorize its attorneys to

5 assert there is no asbestos in Emtal talc?

6 MR. BRESS: I'm going to -- I think that

7 question calls for you to disclose privileged

8 communication so I need to instruct you not to answer.

9 Maybe there's a different way to rephrase

10 it but I don't see how you can answer without --

11 A. Well --

12 MR. BRESS: -- disclosing privileged

13 communication.

14 MR. DONOHUE: Hold on. He's -- he's

15 asked you not to answer.

16 THE WITNESS: Yeah. I was trying to

17 come up with a --

18 MR. DONOHUE: Wait for a question.

19 Q. How about this way?

20 Could Engelhard's attorneys have

21 asserted to Courts and litigants that there was no

22 asbestos in Emtal talc without Engelhard's

23 authorization?

24 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

25 MR. BRESS: Object to the form.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 82 of 218 PageID:

44001
Page 82

1 MR. DONOHUE: You can answer.

2 A. Well, for the cases I was involved in,

3 the nontire worker talc cases, the local counsel were

4 authorized to -- to communicate to plaintiffs counsel

5 based on what was in the materials at Cahill.

6 Q. And were Cahill -- was Cahill authorized

7 to provide materials to local counsel purporting to

8 show that there's no asbestos in Emtal talc without

9 Engelhard's authorization?

10 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

11 Foundation.

12 A. When -- without authorization I -- well,

13 I -- I would ask the local counsel to get the

14 materials from Cahill so they -- they had

15 authorization.

16 Q. You are aware that in defending the

17 Emtal talc litigation Engelhard lawyers asserted that

18 there was no evidence of asbestos in Emtal talc,

19 correct?

20 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

21 A. It was my understanding that the local

22 counsels would assert that there was no -- that the

23 Engelhard talc was safe and that there was no asbestos

24 in it.

25 I -- I'm trying to focus on the word

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 83 of 218 PageID:

44002
Page 83

1 "evidence" in your last question, and I don't remember

2 specifics authorizing or using that phrase.

3 Q. Could Engelhard attorneys assert in

4 litigation that there was no evidence of asbestos in

5 Emtal talc without Engelhard's authorization?

6 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

7 A. In your -- first, the only cases I can

8 speak to are the -- the few I was involved in.

9 Second, I want to put the tire workers

10 aside because I wasn't really involved in the

11 communications between counsel and those cases.

12 In the other talc -- the nontire worker

13 talc cases, the -- you know, the -- the general thing

14 that I can recall was -- was a cover letter-type --

15 you know, a transmittal of these materials that were

16 coming from Cahill. So that was authorized. That's

17 what we wanted them to do, but I didn't review the

18 specifics of the materials so I'm not sure if I can

19 answer your question fully.

20 Q. Okay. For the tire worker cases is it

21 fair to say that Engelhard's Legal Department pretty

22 much outsourced the defense of those cases to Cahill?

23 A. By the time I got involved that was

24 true. I'm not sure that it's true for the entire

25 period the company was involved in the tire worker

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 84 of 218 PageID:

44003
Page 84

1 cases.

2 Q. Do you know when that occurred; when

3 Engelhard outsourced the defense litiga -- of the tire

4 worker litigation to Cahill?

5 A. No.

6 Q. We'll move on to the second point on

7 this attached -- of -- sorry. It's Exhibit 203;

8 Arthur Dornbusch's initial disclosure.

9 It says you have knowledge of the tests

10 and/or inspections of the mine in Johnson, Vermont.

11 What do you know about tests or

12 inspections of the mine in Johnson, Vermont?

13 A. I don't know.

14 Q. Did you ever visit the Johnson mine?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Did you ever oversee tests of ore taken

17 from the Johnson mine?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Do you know why Engelhard closed the

20 Johnson mine?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Do you know when that was?

23 A. I'm sure it happened before I returned

24 to Engelhard in '88. I -- I don't know. It might

25 even have happened before the Legal Departments

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 85 of 218 PageID:

44004
Page 85

1 consolidated in '84 but I'm not sure.

2 Q. Well, let's move on to the next subject

3 then of Arthur Dornbusch.

4 He says -- Arthur Dornbusch says you

5 have knowledge of asbestos tests and/or studies of

6 Engelhard's/BASF's talc.

7 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

8 Q. Do you see that?

9 A. Well, I think it says may have

10 discoverable information but asbestos testing and/or

11 studies.

12 In preparation for this deposition I

13 learned that the Cahill package we've been talking

14 about included some study-type materials but I -- I

15 still haven't seen them or really don't know much

16 about them.

17 Q. Mr. Hassett, are you aware that evidence

18 exists indicating there was asbestos in Emtal talc?

19 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

20 A. No. I know there's allegations. I

21 don't know the evidence.

22 Q. Are you aware that testing data exists

23 concerning the asbestos content of Emtal talc?

24 MR. BRESS: Object to form.

25 A. And, again, the answer is no, I'm not.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 86 of 218 PageID:

44005
Page 86

1 I've heard of allegations. I haven't seen or heard

2 the tests.

3 (Pause.)

4 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sorry. I only

5 have two copies here so you guys could share one from

6 the witness.

7 Tony, can you see this? You know what

8 this is.

9 Sorry. I only have two copies.

10 THE WITNESS: Should I take the clip off?

11 MR. BRESS: Why don't you wait for him

12 to --

13 THE WITNESS: Yeah.

14 MR. BRESS: -- ask you questions.

15 Q. Please. Why don't you just -- you can

16 flip through it. I want to ask you if you've ever

17 seen this document before?

18 THE WITNESS: Have you seen this?

19 MR. DONOHUE: (Indicates.)

20 You look. I got one here.

21 (Pause.)

22 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

23 Q. Mr. Hassett, while you're flipping

24 through, for the record I'll say it in front of you is

25 what's been marked as Exhibit 1 for identification.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 87 of 218 PageID:

44006
Page 87

1 It is a Cahill collection of testing

2 documents excluding privileged documents.

3 I'll represent to you that this was a

4 collection of testing documents assembled by Cahill

5 that was found in the files of Arthur Dornbusch.

6 I'm not going to ask you about every

7 single document but I'd like you just to look through

8 it to see if you have seen this compilation before?

9 A. Well...

10 And this is a pretty thick package.

11 Q. I agree.

12 MR. DONOHUE: The question is have you

13 seen that compilation of documents, correct?

14 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yup.

15 A. Well, no. I mean, I've never seen a

16 collection like this. I'm about a third of the way

17 through and I haven't found a single document that

18 looks familiar. I'll go through the whole thing

19 somewhat more carefully if you want.

20 Q. No. We can start and maybe later we'll

21 come back through it.

22 Have you ever heard of something called

23 the Hyde memo before?

24 A. No.

25 Q. If Arthur Dornbusch had relevant

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 88 of 218 PageID:

44007
Page 88

1 evidence in his files would you have -- expect that to

2 share -- would you expect him to share that with you?

3 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

4 MR. BRESS: Object to the form.

5 MR. DONOHUE: You can answer.

6 A. If it was relevant to a specific request

7 that he was legally obliged to respond to and he had

8 no, you know, defense of privilege or anything that

9 would relieve him of that obligation, then I would

10 expect him to.

11 Q. Maybe over lunch you could go through

12 the materials but I want to direct you to --

13 A. I'm down to a 20-minute lunch already.

14 Come on.

15 Q. Sorry. Bagel --

16 A. When do I eat?

17 MR. DONOHUE: You lost your microphone.

18 THE WITNESS: That's okay. That remark

19 was better off the record.

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Fair. Bagel in

21 one hand, book in the other.

22 Q. I want to -- I'll direct your attention

23 to Tab 29. Just point out one of these documents.

24 A. Okay. That was the tabs. All right. I

25 see. All right. Cool. All right.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 89 of 218 PageID:

44008
Page 89

1 Q. It begins at Bates stamp 13157? If

2 you're using the same --

3 A. Yeah. I've got -- yeah. Okay.

4 Q. Tab 29 is a memo from E.J. Triglia to a

5 G.A. Hemstock dated May 22nd, 1979. Subject: Talc

6 investigation.

7 Do you see that? The very top.

8 THE WITNESS: All right. Make it

9 easier.

10 A. Got it. Even -- yeah. Okay.

11 Q. Do you know who G.A. Hemstock is?

12 A. I've heard the name but that's all.

13 Q. Okay. Do you know who an E.J. Triglia

14 is?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. I've heard the name -- I've heard his

18 name in prep but I -- other than that I know nothing.

19 Q. Well, I'll direct you to the second

20 paragraph that's highlighted.

21 A. "With the realization."

22 Q. Correct.

23 It says, "With the realization that we

24 have found fibers in one of our Emtal samples several

25 more samples of Emtal 42 were submitted to Georgia

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 90 of 218 PageID:

44009
Page 90

1 Tech for assay; one from recent and the other from

2 earlier 1977 production.

3 "Each sample showed traces of fiber that

4 were mostly smaller than 5 microns in length.

5 "These same samples were subsequently

6 sent to two other independent laboratories for

7 confirmation. Their results were in general agreement

8 with those reported by the Georgia Institute of

9 Technology."

10 Do you see that?

11 A. Yup. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Is today the first time that you are

13 learning that Engelhard and Cahill had evidence that

14 three separate laboratories had found asbestos in

15 Emtal talc?

16 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

17 MR. BRESS: Object.

18 MR. DONOHUE: You can answer.

19 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

20 Misstates the document.

21 A. Well, first, the paragraph we just read

22 doesn't say there was asbestos but I had not seen this

23 document and was not aware of it.

24 Q. Okay. Mr. Hassett, you can put that

25 over to the side. We'll come back to that later.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 91 of 218 PageID:

44010
Page 91

1 MR. DONOHUE: I'll do it.

2 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

3 Q. Are you aware generally that Engelhard's

4 scientists found asbestos in Emtal talc?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Are you aware that Engelhard's

7 scientists testified about the testing of Emtal talc

8 for asbestos?

9 A. I'm only aware of -- only recently

10 became aware of allegations to that effect.

11 Q. Sure. Are you aware that Engelhard

12 scientists testified that there were test results

13 showing asbestos in Emtal talc?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Okay.

16 (Pause.)

17 (Exhibit 3 marked for identification.)

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: One copy.

19 Tim, you're getting excerpts.

20 MR. DONOHUE: Objection. Sorry.

21 Q. Mr. Hassett, in front of you is what's

22 been marked as Exhibit 3 for identification.

23 If you see on the first page it says

24 it's a deposition in the District Court for the

25 District of Rhode Island in the Westfall case.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 92 of 218 PageID:

44011
Page 92

1 Do you see that up top?

2 A. Yup.

3 Q. And it says it's the continued

4 deposition of Glenn Hemstock on March 16th, 1983. Do

5 you see that?

6 A. Yeah.

7 Q. Are you aware that Dr. Hemstock was the

8 vice-president of research and development for

9 Engelhard?

10 A. I did not know his title or his job.

11 Q. Did you recall him when you were at

12 Engelhard?

13 A. No.

14 Q. I'm going to direct your attention to

15 Bates stamp page 14484 to the highlighted portion and

16 it says:

17 "Question: Now, you testified that your

18 department has tested both processed talc and raw talc

19 ore from the Emtal mine for the presence of chrysotile

20 asbestos. Is that correct?

21 "Answer: Yes.

22 "Question: Has your department in its

23 research found chrysotile asbestos in both processed

24 talc and raw ore from the Emtal mine?

25 "Answer: Yes."

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 93 of 218 PageID:

44012
Page 93

1 Do you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Did I read that correctly?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Have you ever seen the testimony before

6 today where Dr. Hemstock testified that his department

7 found asbestos in both the Johnson mine ore and the

8 Emtal product?

9 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

10 A. I have never seen this testimony or any

11 other from Glenn Hemstock on any subject including

12 those.

13 Q. Did -- did you know before today that

14 Glenn Hemstock ever gave a deposition in the 1980s?

15 A. No.

16 Q. You know what? Before I put this

17 document down could you please turn to the second

18 page. You see it says Appearances. These are

19 appearances of counsel?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And on the bottom is -- highlighted is

22 Cahill, Gordon and Reindel by Howard G. Sloane and

23 Thomas Halket on behalf of Engelhard Corporation and

24 Glenn Hemstock.

25 Do you see that?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 94 of 218 PageID:

44013
Page 94

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Howard G. Sloane you understand to be

3 Peter Sloane?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Peter Sloane that you interacted with in

6 defense of the Emtal litigation?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And Thomas Halket I believe you said

9 earlier that that name was familiar to you?

10 A. Yes. Well, we heard it on the

11 introduction to the call but I did know Thomas. We

12 briefly overlapped at Engelhard, too.

13 Q. You worked together -- both worked

14 together for a brief time in the Legal Department at

15 Engelhard?

16 A. Right. We were both -- yes.

17 (Pause.)

18 (Exhibit 4 marked for identification.)

19 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: This is my

20 version. I guess I only have my version but it's

21 okay. Here you go.

22 MR. DONOHUE: For the witness?

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yup. Here's

24 excerpts.

25 Q. Mr. Hassett, in front of you what I've

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 95 of 218 PageID:

44014
Page 95

1 marked as Exhibit 4 for identification is a deposition

2 of Peter N. Gale taken on April 26, 1983 in that same

3 Westfall case.

4 Do you see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Did you know that Peter Gale was a

7 geologist who worked for Engelhard?

8 A. No.

9 Q. I'm going to direct your attention to

10 Page 21 of the transcript. It's Bates stamped 9732.

11 A. I'm with you.

12 Q. So starting at line 9. If you could

13 follow along with me.

14 The question is, "As I understand it

15 you've testified this morning that your first studies

16 on Johnson, Vermont, talc were done in the fall of

17 1978 utilizing x-ray diffraction instruments at

18 Engelhard Laboratories. Is that correct?

19 "Answer: That's correct.

20 "Question: You testified that the

21 studies revealed the presence of talc, magnesite and

22 chlorite. Is that correct?

23 "Answer: That's correct.

24 "Question: You testified next as I

25 understand it the following -- that following that

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 96 of 218 PageID:

44015
Page 96

1 study you performed a further study utilizing scanning

2 electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy

3 and selected -- select area electron defraction at

4 Georgia Tech laboratories. Is that correct?

5 "Answer: That's correct.

6 "Question: Was that just one study you

7 performed at Georgia Tech?

8 "Answer: I was at Georgia Tech on a

9 number of occasions" -- turn to the next page --

10 "looking at a sam -- number of samples each time.

11 "Question: You testified that your

12 analysis at Georgia Tech revealed the presence of

13 fibers and that the fibers were identified by you as

14 being chrysotile. Is that correct?

15 "Answer: That's correct."

16 Have you ever seen this testimony before

17 today where Mr. Gale testifies that he tested Johnson,

18 Vermont, talc at Georgia Tech and found chrysotile

19 asbestos?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Is today the first time you are ever

22 seeing the deposition of Peter Gale in the Westfall

23 case?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. When was the first time you became aware

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 97 of 218 PageID:

44016
Page 97

1 of the Westfall case?

2 A. I believe it was shortly after I learned

3 of the Martin case.

4 Q. And under what circumstances in the

5 context of the Martin case did you learn about the

6 Westfall case?

7 MR. BRESS: Do you need to speak with us?

8 THE WITNESS: I may need some privilege

9 guidance, I'm sorry, to...

10 MR. BRESS: Don't have to apol --

11 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Short break.

12 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:54 p.m.

13 Off the record.

14 (At this time the witness and counsel

15 leave the deposition room at 12:54 p.m.)

16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 1 p.m.

17 We're on the record.

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Pat, can we have

19 that last question read back? Thank you.

20 (The following question is read back by

21 the reporter:

22 "Question: And under what circumstances

23 in the context of the Martin case did you learn about

24 the Westfall case?")

25 A. Plaintiffs or their counsel raised some

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 98 of 218 PageID:

44017
Page 98

1 allegations that referred back to the Westfall case

2 and anything else I could say about this would be

3 subject to attorney-client privilege.

4 Q. Without getting into specific

5 communications who did you communicate with about the

6 Westfall case in the context of the Martin case?

7 A. In the context of?

8 Q. The Martin case?

9 A. Well, I -- I -- who did I communicate

10 about the Westfall case?

11 Q. Right.

12 MR. DONOHUE: Who did you communicate

13 with?

14 A. Arthur and Howard Merten.

15 That's all I can specifically remember.

16 Q. What were the allegations of the

17 plaintiffs counsel that you're referring to?

18 Sorry. In your previous answer you said

19 there was allegations made by the plaintiffs counsel

20 in the Martin case that referred to the Westfall case.

21 What were those allegations?

22 A. I don't -- I don't think I can go into

23 that without running into the same privilege issue.

24 Q. Okay. I'm not asking what, you know,

25 Arthur Dornbusch, Cahill or anybody else told you, but

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 99 of 218 PageID:

44018
Page 99

1 what's your understanding of the allegations raised by

2 the plaintiff counsel?

3 A. But my understanding even -- even the

4 allegations themselves all came through Howard Merten

5 so I don't -- I don't have a --

6 MR. DONOHUE: Can you say generally what

7 the allegations were?

8 MR. BRESS: Do you -- maybe you could

9 ask if he knows the answer to the question you're

10 asking?

11 A. I do know some -- some -- at least one

12 item that would be responsive.

13 MR. BRESS: Can I find out?

14 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

15 MR. BRESS: Trying to help you

16 guys here.

17 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure. Why

18 don't -- do we have to go off the record or...

19 MR. BRESS: Well, yeah. Go off just so

20 the tape's not running.

21 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

22 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Our time is 1:03 p.m.

23 Off the record.

24 (At this time the witness and counsel

25 leave the deposition room at 1:03 p.m.)

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 100 of 218 PageID:

44019
Page 100

1 THE WITNESS: Okay.

2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 1:04 p.m.

3 On the record.

4 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

5 Q. Okay. Mr. Hassett, before we broke I

6 believe the question I raised to you was what is your

7 understanding of the allegations raised by the

8 plaintiffs counsel relating to the Westfall case in

9 the context of the Martin case?

10 A. My understanding was that plaintiffs

11 were alleging they had an expert with some kind of

12 ties to the Westfall case who was prepared to offer

13 some sort of evidence of asbestos content in the

14 Engelhard -- in the Emtal talc.

15 Q. And was this the first time that you --

16 you heard of evidence that someone had -- that

17 Engelhard's Emtal talc contained asbestos?

18 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

19 A. All I heard was an allegation and this

20 was the -- the first specific allegation of that kind.

21 Q. Okay. There is one more area that Mr.

22 Dornbusch discusses in his disclosures. Maybe we

23 could go through that and then take a lunch break --

24 MR. DONOHUE: Sure.

25 Q. -- if that's okay. Figured that would

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 101 of 218 PageID:

44020
Page 101

1 be a clean break.

2 So if we turn back to Exhibit 203,

3 please.

4 THE WITNESS: Thanks.

5 Q. The fourth area that Mr. Dornbusch

6 believes you have knowledge of is the retention of

7 records and documents related to Engelhard's BASF --

8 Engelhard/BASF talc and asbestos-related litigation.

9 Do you see that?

10 A. Yup --

11 Q. What do --

12 A. -- I do.

13 Q. What do you recall about that?

14 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

15 A. Well, I don't have anything to add to

16 what we discussed earlier about files on the specific

17 cases --

18 Q. Mm'mm.

19 A. -- I was involved in, and there -- you

20 know, the only other thing I -- I can think of that

21 would be responsive here is the company had a general

22 policy on retaining records and it included the

23 requirement to the maintain litigation records for a

24 certain period of time and then destroy them at the

25 end of that period and, of course, everybody

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 102 of 218 PageID:

44021
Page 102

1 understood there was a -- you know, for pending

2 litigation had to preserve records.

3 Q. Mm'mm.

4 A. But none of that was talc-specific. It

5 was just general like the other types of records.

6 Q. And in particular to the Emtal talc

7 litigation was it Engelhard's position that once a

8 case concluded that litigation files pertained to that

9 case could be destroyed?

10 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

11 I think you're also asking him for work product and

12 mental impression.

13 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I'm asking for

14 the general policy.

15 MR. BRESS: Well, I don't -- I don't --

16 I don't know that you've established that he knows the

17 answer to that question but the way the question was

18 phrased I think called for him to offer you what is

19 essentially a legal conclusion on behalf of the

20 company so maybe there's a different way to rephrase

21 it.

22 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

23 Q. Was it Engelhard's policy that

24 litigation records pertaining to a talc litigation

25 could be destroyed after that particular case

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 103 of 218 PageID:

44022
Page 103

1 concluded?

2 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

3 THE WITNESS: Should I answer?

4 MR. DONOHUE: You could answer.

5 A. First, there was no -- a no policy of

6 any kind specific to talc litigation.

7 Q. Okay.

8 A. There were policies applicable to

9 litigation generally and they did allow -- you know,

10 they had both preservation and then permitted

11 destruction but the understanding that -- that you

12 needed to preserve documents for any open claim would

13 override the permitted destruction.

14 Q. Was it Engelhard's policy that following

15 the conclusion of a specific litigation that doc --

16 litigation documents pertaining to that litigation

17 could be discarded?

18 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

19 A. I -- yeah. I'm not -- I'm not sure I

20 fully understand the question.

21 The policy had a -- a preservation

22 period and then at the end of that, you know,

23 destruction.

24 Q. That preservation period would be at

25 least until the end of the litigation. Is that fair?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 104 of 218 PageID:

44023
Page 104

1 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

2 A. Yeah. I -- I believe it was for a

3 period after that but I -- I don't really remember the

4 specifics of the retention policy.

5 Q. Okay. And when you said in your prep I

6 believe that you reviewed an Engelhard record

7 retention policy. Is that fair?

8 A. Yeah. Reviewed the way I reviewed the --

9 the 50 -- 50-page thing.

10 I saw it was there.

11 Q. Okay. What was the date of this record

12 retention policy?

13 A. I don't remember.

14 Q. Okay. When do you recall a record

15 retention policy at Engelhard first being implemented?

16 A. I don't remember.

17 Q. Okay. Do you recall at whose direction

18 a record retention policy was initiated?

19 A. You know, I don't -- I just don't

20 remember anything about the initiation of the policy.

21 It might even have occurred when I wasn't -- before I

22 started at Engelhard.

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: You know what?

24 Let me show you one document before we take a break.

25 (Pause.)

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 105 of 218 PageID:

44024
Page 105

1 A. Okay.

2 Q. In front of you, Mr. Hassett, is what's

3 been marked as Exhibit 15 for identification. It's a

4 memoranda from a G.A. Hemstock to all R and D

5 personnel dated March 7, 1984. Subject: Document

6 Retrieval Discontinued Operations.

7 Do you see that?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Have you ever seen this document before?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Okay. Were you still at Engelhard when

12 this document was issued?

13 A. Poss -- I'm not sure.

14 Q. Okay. And it says, "It is the policy of

15 Engelhard Corporation to avoid the undue accumulation

16 of documents that are no longer likely to be needed in

17 our business operation. The regular discarding of

18 outdated business records," and it goes on further --

19 three more lines.

20 Do you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Okay. And it talks about -- at the end

23 of that paragraph it says -- pertains to the

24 "following discontinued operations," and Emtal is

25 listed.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 106 of 218 PageID:

44025
Page 106

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. All right. The first paragraph of -- I

3 mean, the first sentence of the second paragraph below

4 says, "All information contained in your files

5 pertaining to these operations should be withdrawn and

6 placed in files for discard."

7 Do you see that?

8 A. For discard -- yes. I see the whole

9 thing, yes.

10 Q. Okay. And at the very bottom, the last

11 sentence says, "Please understand that it is our

12 intent to retain copies of those documents to be

13 preserved from discontinued operations only in our

14 central files and can be accessed there should the

15 need arise."

16 Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. When you were working at Engelhard in

19 the early 1980s were you aware of a document retention

20 policy specifically for discontinued operations?

21 A. I -- I don't remember.

22 Q. Okay. Do you -- are you aware of any

23 Emtal-related documents that were collected pursuant

24 to this memo?

25 A. No.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 107 of 218 PageID:

44026
Page 107

1 Q. Do you know who would have been in

2 charge of collecting such documents?

3 A. No. I mean, other than what's on the

4 face of the memo.

5 Q. Would it surprise you if the memo was

6 drafted by the Legal Department?

7 A. No.

8 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

9 A. No.

10 Q. Do you know what documents pertaining to

11 Emtal were discarded pursuant to this memo?

12 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

13 A. No.

14 Q. And do you know who would have discarded

15 documents related to Emtal pursuant to this memo?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Are you aware of any document retention

18 policies before this one in Exhibit 15?

19 A. Before this memo that --

20 Q. Yeah.

21 A. -- we're looking at right now?

22 No, I don't remember when the policy was

23 initiated.

24 Q. Okay. In the document retention policy

25 that you reviewed did the Legal Department have any

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 108 of 218 PageID:

44027
Page 108

1 role in drafting that policy?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you know who had a role in drafting

4 that policy within the Legal Department?

5 A. I don't -- I think that Al McWilliams

6 who was the in-house lawyer who was the -- the sort

7 of -- the guy to go to on records retention questions

8 for the business departments would occasionally change

9 it to accommodate changes in the law or new

10 developments in records or whatever.

11 Q. Do you know -- have you spoken with Al

12 McWilliams in any recent time?

13 A. Al McWilliams passed away several years

14 ago.

15 Q. Do you recall anybody else in the Legal

16 Department who would have input in what should be

17 included in an Engelhard's document retention policy?

18 A. I -- no.

19 Q. Two more questions before lunch.

20 Was it Engelhard's policy to retain

21 documents pertaining to a certain business unit if

22 litigation was pending?

23 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

24 A. Well, certainly our policy and practice

25 in -- maintain documents relating to a pending

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 109 of 218 PageID:

44028
Page 109

1 litigation, how -- how far -- you know, relating

2 didn't necessarily include all documents for a

3 business unit.

4 Q. Turning back to Exhibit 15. You see

5 that it's to all R and D personnel, and one of the

6 business units that's listed is Emtal, correct?

7 A. Okay.

8 Q. If there was litigation pending

9 pertaining to Emtal was it Engelhard's retention --

10 was it Engelhard's policy to retain documents in the R

11 and D Department?

12 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

13 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

14 Foundation.

15 A. And I think that when it came to

16 retention for pending claims or known claims the scope

17 of the claim was -- you can't answer that question

18 without understanding the scope of the claim.

19 I don't -- I don't really know the

20 details of the scope of Emtal's business.

21 Q. But -- well, I'm just -- you understand

22 then in a general Emtal talc case the allegation is

23 that Emtal talc, you know, causes asbestos disease.

24 Is that fair?

25 A. I understand that's alleged.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 110 of 218 PageID:

44029
Page 110

1 Q. Right. That's alleged.

2 So when those types of cases -- if that --

3 if that case is pending was it Engelhard's policy to

4 retain R and D documents relating to Emtal?

5 MR. BRESS: Object to the form.

6 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

7 MR. BRESS: Foundation.

8 A. Well, I mean, I don't know when, what

9 case was pending or open. I don't know what -- was

10 the research about a great potential new use for talc

11 that had nothing to do with asbestos cases?

12 I don't know.

13 I mean, the scope of the retention for

14 pending claims depends on the scope of the claims and

15 the scope of the records.

16 Q. So --

17 A. You're ask -- you're asking me to make

18 up all this stuff and I feel like I -- I don't know

19 anything about.

20 Q. That's fair. That's fair.

21 If the Emtal talc claim alleges injury --

22 well -- alleges asbestos injury from Emtal talc --

23 A. Right?

24 Q. -- was it Engelhard's policy to retain R

25 and D documents relating to asbestos and Emtal?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 111 of 218 PageID:

44030
Page 111

1 MR. BRESS: Objection.

2 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

3 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

4 Q. I --

5 MR. BRESS: Asked and answered.

6 A. And I don't -- the -- the policy

7 specifics relating to Emtal I was not involved in. I

8 don't know the policy.

9 The specifics relating to Emtal I was

10 not involved in and don't know.

11 The knowledge I have of Engelhard's

12 retention policy and its practice on pending claims

13 I've already tried to describe as best I can.

14 Q. Would you have expected working in the

15 in-house Legal Department at Engelhard that if cases --

16 Emtal cases pertaining to asbestos -- alleging asbestos

17 exposure were pending that R and D documents involving

18 Emtal and asbestos would be retained?

19 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

20 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

21 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

22 Hold on a second, Mike.

23 I think you're essentially asking him

24 for a legal judgment here so perhaps there's a way to

25 rephrase this without inviting a work product

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 112 of 218 PageID:

44031
Page 112

1 objection.

2 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: It's kind of the

3 pattern and process in the Legal Department. I'm not

4 asking for his work product.

5 MR. BRESS: Well, you asked him if he

6 would expect something. That's a little bit

7 different.

8 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure. Let me try

9 it this way.

10 Q. Was it the pattern or practice of the

11 Legal Department to retain R and D -- Emtal R and D

12 documents that discussed asbestos if there were --

13 Emtal claims pending alleging injury from asbestos?

14 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

15 A. Well, I -- I think I've already said

16 our -- our practice was not to destroy documents

17 relating to a pending claim.

18 Q. Okay.

19 A. Without knowing the claim and without

20 knowing what happened to these documents that were to

21 be preserved I -- I just don't know how this -- I

22 don't know the claim. I don't know the -- the scope

23 of what was actually supposed to be destroyed versus

24 retained.

25 Q. I've got one question and I'll try and

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 113 of 218 PageID:

44032
Page 113

1 word it in an artfully way around the same context.

2 If litigation was reasonably foreseeable

3 involving allegations of injury -- asbestos injury

4 from Emtal talc was it the pattern and practice of the

5 Legal Department to retain R and D documents of Emtal

6 and asbestos?

7 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form. Foundation.

8 A. And --

9 MR. BRESS: Calls for a legal conclusion.

10 A. Yeah. The specifics of how the -- I

11 don't even know if the regular policy existed in '84

12 and I don't know if I was working at Engelhard at this

13 time.

14 Q. Mm'mm.

15 A. And how pending claims and relevant

16 documents would have been assessed I -- I'd just be

17 guessing. I...

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay. Well,

19 let's break for lunch.

20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 1:23 p.m.

21 Off the record.

22 (Luncheon recess taken at 1:23 p.m.)

23 AFTERNOON SESSION

24 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Time is 2:03 p.m.

25 We're on the record.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 114 of 218 PageID:

44033
Page 114

1 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

2 Q. All right. Mr. Hassett, we are back

3 after lunch.

4 I want to show you next what's been

5 marked as Exhibit 57 for identification.

6 MR. VALE: Thank you.

7 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

8 THE WITNESS: Wait. All -- all the

9 other lawyers are telling me I'm not allowed to take

10 anything.

11 Q. Mr. Hassett, what's in front of you is

12 what's been marked as Exhibit 57 for identification.

13 These are responses by Engelhard Corporation to

14 Plaintiff's First Set -- First Standard Set of

15 Liability Interrogatories in the Chernick case and

16 they are dated April 16th, 2002 if you look at the

17 last -- the second -- the last and second to last

18 pages.

19 A. Okay. I do -- I do see the two dates,

20 yes.

21 Q. Have you ever seen these responses

22 before today?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Were these the responses that were

25 presented to you yesterday?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 115 of 218 PageID:

44034
Page 115

1 A. At least the significant portion of it.

2 I'm not sure if I had the whole thing yesterday.

3 Q. I'd like to go through these with you.

4 If you turn to the second page and the

5 response to Interrogatory 1.

6 It says, "State the full name, address,

7 telephone number, position of the corporate officer

8 answering these Interrogatories."

9 And response, "Michael J. Hassett,

10 Esquire, Associate General Counsel for Engelhard

11 Corporation, coordinated Engelhard's responses to the

12 second set."

13 Do you see that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Michael J. Hassett. That's you?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. What does it mean to coordinate

18 Engelhard's responses?

19 A. In this particular case --

20 Q. Mm'mm.

21 A. -- it meant -- before we responded we

22 had retained the firm of Paduano and Weintraub as

23 counsel, and I asked them to work with Cahill to get

24 whatever information they needed to reply and that was

25 pretty much the extent of my coordination in a -- in

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 116 of 218 PageID:

44035
Page 116

1 this case.

2 Q. Did you have any personal knowledge when

3 answering these Interrogatories?

4 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

5 A. I did not.

6 Q. So coordinates generally means that you

7 were the funnel of the information. Is that fair?

8 And -- that your local counsel and Cahill would work

9 together and give you the information that was needed --

10 A. No.

11 Q. -- for these Interrogatories?

12 A. That -- that is not --

13 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

14 A. -- correct.

15 Q. Then please explain it to me.

16 A. They were able to work directly with one

17 another. I wasn't necessarily a funnel or in the

18 middle of that communication.

19 Q. So coordinates means you just put them

20 in touch and they responded to the Interrogatories?

21 A. In this case, yes.

22 Q. In this case.

23 And did you review the answers before

24 they were verified and served?

25 A. I don't recall reviewing these specific

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 117 of 218 PageID:

44036
Page 117

1 Answers in this particular case.

2 Q. Why was it decided that you'd be the one

3 to coordinate the Interrog -- coordinate the responses

4 to the Interrogatories?

5 A. I don't remember.

6 Q. Do you recall who tasked you with the

7 assignment to coordinate the Interrogatories?

8 MR. BRESS: Objection.

9 Q. These Interrogatories?

10 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

11 A. In -- and I do not remember the answer --

12 I don't know the answer to that question.

13 Q. Sure.

14 A. I don't recall.

15 Q. I want you to turn your attention to the

16 last page, please.

17 A. Okay. Is that the affirmation of

18 service?

19 Q. Oh, sorry. The Verification.

20 A. Got it.

21 Q. You see the third sentence, "Gideon Mark

22 verifies or affirms"?

23 "Working in conjunction with Engelhard I

24 have prepared and reviewed the foregoing responses to

25 first standard set liability Interrogatories. I know

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 118 of 218 PageID:

44037
Page 118

1 the contents thereof to be true based on the factual

2 analysis conducted with and on behalf of Engelhard."

3 Do you see that?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. What factual analysis did Gideon Mark

6 conduct with Engelhard?

7 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

8 A. Well, I -- I don't know.

9 I do remember speaking with Gideon on

10 the phone.

11 My only knowledge was that the

12 available -- the records available at Cahill were I

13 thought all the company had so --

14 Q. Mm'mm.

15 A. -- you know, the -- but I think that's --

16 that's all -- all the analysis I'm aware of.

17 Q. Okay. So you coordinated the lawyers to

18 work together; not necessarily the responses. Is that

19 fair?

20 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

21 A. I don't really --

22 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.

23 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

24 MR. DONOHUE: It was an objection to

25 form. I'll join.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 119 of 218 PageID:

44038
Page 119

1 A. And I don't -- I don't remember this

2 specific response that well. That might be true but

3 I -- you know, I just don't remember it that well.

4 Q. Did you ever read the actual

5 Interrogatories?

6 A. I don't remember.

7 Q. Okay. So fair to say that you yourself

8 did not consult any records or speak to any

9 nonattorney personnel in answering these questions?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Would you agree with me that as an

12 officer of the Court it would be a violation of the

13 duty of candor to intentionally provide discovery

14 responses that a lawyer had reason to believe were

15 incomplete or misleading?

16 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

17 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

18 MR. DONOHUE: You could answer.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Would you agree with me that plaintiffs

21 would make decisions and value cases based on the

22 information disclosed to them in discovery responses

23 such as in Exhibit 57?

24 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

25 MR. BRESS: Join.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 120 of 218 PageID:

44039
Page 120

1 A. I would say that's a logical surmise but

2 I've never actually been involved in that process and

3 I don't have any firsthand information.

4 Q. Would you expect that lawyers with

5 historical knowledge of information would disclose the

6 information to individuals certifying Interrogatories

7 or coordinating Answers To Interrogatories --

8 MR. DONOHUE: Object.

9 Q. -- like this to insure that they are

10 complete and accurate?

11 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

12 MR. BRESS: Join.

13 MR. DONOHUE: You may answer.

14 A. Could you repeat that -- the beginning --

15 read the question please.

16 Q. Sure.

17 (Last question read back by the reporter.)

18 A. So if a lawyer was in possession of

19 information and was asked to participate in some way

20 in the response would they disclose relevant

21 information?

22 Q. Would you expect that they would disclose

23 that to you? Yes.

24 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

25 A. And I -- I believe in general they

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 121 of 218 PageID:

44040
Page 121

1 should.

2 Q. So if Mr. Dornbusch had information in

3 his possession that contradicted responses to these

4 Interrogatories would you believe that he had an

5 obligation to disclose that information to you so that

6 you could provide honest and complete answers as the

7 corporate officer coordinating these responses?

8 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

9 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

10 A. If Mr. Dornbusch knew of the response

11 and read it closely enough to realize it was incorrect

12 I believe he should have and would have said

13 something.

14 Q. If Peter --

15 A. And -- and it was -- I mean, assuming it

16 was incorrect as well.

17 Q. If Peter Sloane had information in his

18 possession contradicting responses to these

19 Interrogatories would you -- do you believe that he

20 had an obligation to disclose that information to you

21 so that you could provide honest and complete answers

22 as the corporate officer coordinating these responses?

23 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

24 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

25 A. Well -- you know, as with Arthur, if --

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 122 of 218 PageID:

44041
Page 122

1 if he knew about the inquiry and the response and knew

2 that it was incorrect and he had information that he

3 felt he was not required to withhold because of

4 privilege or anything else -- but -- you know, I don't

5 have any reason to believe that either Peter Sloane or

6 Arthur saw this.

7 Q. Okay.

8 A. So I -- you're asking me a hypothetical

9 question.

10 My answer is generally if somebody has

11 information and they're -- it's within the control of

12 the Respondent and they know -- they're being asked

13 whether it's correct or not and they know it's not,

14 yeah, they should -- they should advise the -- the

15 Respondent that it's incorrect but that -- that's a

16 general hypothetical answer.

17 I -- I don't have any knowledge of what --

18 what either of those people saw in this matter.

19 Q. So if Arthur Dornbusch had the Westfall

20 deposition transcripts that we went over earlier in

21 his possession or he knew about them do you believe

22 that he had an obligation to disclose that information

23 to you so that you could provide an honest and

24 complete answer as the corporate officer coordinating

25 these responses?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 123 of 218 PageID:

44042
Page 123

1 MR. BRESS: Objection --

2 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

3 MR. BRESS: -- to form.

4 You're now also just -- you're asking

5 for basically legal judgments and mental conclusions,

6 mental impressions.

7 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: That's fine. He

8 could answer.

9 MR. BRESS: I'm not sure he can the way

10 you phrased that.

11 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Let's see if he

12 can. You don't have to instruct him.

13 MR. DONOHUE: Well -- okay.

14 I -- I think what Mr. Bress was getting

15 at was -- if he's talking about mental impressions and

16 conclusions that it could be attorney work product

17 but --

18 MR. BRESS: Correct.

19 MR. DONOHUE: -- so that would be

20 something that I would not want the witness to divulge.

21 Q. If Dornbusch had -- if Mr. Dornbusch had

22 the Westfall deposition -- depositions that we

23 discussed earlier in his possession or was aware of

24 them would you hope that he would disclose that

25 information to you so that you can provide honest and

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 124 of 218 PageID:

44043
Page 124

1 complete answers as the corporate officer coordinating

2 these Interrogatory responses?

3 MR. BRESS: I have to --

4 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

5 MR. BRESS: I have --

6 MR. DONOHUE: You can answer that.

7 MR. BRESS: I have to object to form but

8 I also think that as phrased I don't see how you can

9 answer that without disclosing work product. If

10 you're able to...

11 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: It's not attorney

12 work product.

13 Q. You can answer?

14 MR. DONOHUE: Well, I'm going to -- I'm

15 not going to --

16 MR. BRESS: I need -- I need to talk --

17 I -- I...

18 I'm going to have to step outside with

19 the witness then. I'm going -- if you're going to

20 persist with the line of questioning.

21 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Be my guest.

22 MR. DONOHUE: All right.

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Do what you got

24 to do.

25 MR. DONOHUE: Let's go.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 125 of 218 PageID:

44044
Page 125

1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 2:18 p.m.

2 Off the record.

3 (At this time the witness and counsel

4 leave the deposition room at 2:18 p.m.)

5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is now 2:34

6 p.m. On the record.

7 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Before our break

8 I believe I had a question pending.

9 Pat, would you mind reading it back for

10 us.

11 (The following question is read back by

12 the reporter:

13 "Question: If Mr. Dornbusch had the

14 Westfall depositions that we discussed earlier in his

15 possession or was aware of them would you hope that he

16 would disclose that information to you so that you can

17 provide honest and complete answers as the corporate

18 officer coordinating those Interrogatory responses?")

19 A. So I --

20 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

21 MR. DONOHUE: Join.

22 A. I mean, you're -- you're asking me to

23 assume that Mr. Dornbusch had these depositions, that

24 he was aware of the Interrogatory, that he knew the

25 depositions would be responsive to something in the

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 126 of 218 PageID:

44045
Page 126

1 Interrogatory and that he consulted me about whether

2 to include them or not, and I just -- I don't know.

3 It's -- it's too many ifs.

4 I cannot answer the -- the question.

5 Q. So let's turn to Page 35 of the

6 Interrogatories.

7 A. 35. Okay.

8 Q. Interrogatory 63. Do you see that?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. It says, "If any of your employees or

11 officers have testified at trial or by deposition or

12 before any Congressional committee or administrative

13 agency concerning asbestos exposure, pulmonary or

14 asbestos-related diseases or industrial hygiene

15 relating to asbestos, state," and it says A through D.

16 Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And you see the response to number 63

19 says "no." Do you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Would you agree with me that Exhibits 3

22 and 4, the depositions of Dr. Hemstock and Mr. Gale in

23 the Westfall case, would be responsive to this

24 Interrogatory?

25 MR. BRESS: Okay. That I'm going to

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 127 of 218 PageID:

44046
Page 127

1 instruct you not to answer. That really is asking for

2 his legal judgment.

3 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: He coordinated

4 the responses. He's the corporate officer answering

5 the questions on behalf of the company. He should --

6 MR. BRESS: He's testified that when you

7 said he coordinated the responses he put two outside

8 counsel together.

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: But he's

10 ultimately responsible --

11 MR. DONOHUE: Wait a minute. He didn't

12 sign the Verification.

13 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Right. Fair.

14 MR. DONOHUE: So -- and, you know,

15 certainly I don't want to mischaracterize what his

16 role was in --

17 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

18 MR. DONOHUE: -- coordinating.

19 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: How about this?

20 Q. Mr. Hassett, reading that Interrogatory

21 and now knowing about Exhibits 3 and 4, the Hemstock

22 deposition and Mr. Gale's deposition from the Westfall

23 case, would you have expected that those answering

24 these Interrogatories on behalf of the company would

25 include -- would identify those transcripts in

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 128 of 218 PageID:

44047
Page 128

1 response to our -- Interrogatory 63?

2 MR. BRESS: Can you repeat the question?

3 Or read it back, please.

4 MR. DONOHUE: Read it back.

5 (Last question read back by the

6 reporter.)

7 MR. BRESS: Again, I think maybe there's

8 some other way to rephrase it but I think you're

9 asking for his mental impressions about how he regards

10 certain documents as relevant to a certain

11 Interrogatory.

12 Q. Do you know the answer to my question,

13 Mr. Hassett?

14 A. Well, I think your question is asking

15 for my opinion.

16 Are you asking for my opinion or my --

17 what my course of conduct would have been? I'm not

18 quite sure...

19 Q. Well, how about this question?

20 If you knew about the Hemstock and Gale

21 depositions would you have insured that they would

22 have been identified in response to Interrogatory

23 Number 63?

24 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

25 MR. DONOHUE: Same.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 129 of 218 PageID:

44048
Page 129

1 A. You know, I -- I still am not fully

2 familiar with those documents although we did look at

3 excerpts today.

4 Based on what I saw in the excerpts I

5 would certainly consult experienced litigation counsel

6 and possibly get some technical assistance before I

7 give a simple no in response to this question but

8 beyond that I don't know.

9 Q. Okay. If Cahill Gordon had possession,

10 custody or control of Exhibits 3 and 4, the Hemstock

11 and Gale Westfall transcripts, would you have expected

12 them as your lawyers -- as Engelhard's lawyers to

13 disclose those deposition transcripts to you when

14 coordinating the responses to Interrogatory Number 63?

15 MR. BRESS: Objection form.

16 MR. DONOHUE: I have an objection to

17 form and -- and a continuing objection.

18 And I've let this go for awhile but --

19 but this witness is a fact witness.

20 You've asked a series now of

21 hypothetical questions about which this witness has no

22 factual knowledge so, you know, I'm -- I'm hoping at

23 some point you're going to cut off this line of

24 hypotheticals.

25 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 130 of 218 PageID:

44049
Page 130

1 Q. You can answer.

2 A. What was the question again?

3 (The following question is read back by

4 the reporter:

5 "Question: If Cahill Gordon had

6 possession, custody or control of Exhibits 3 and 4,

7 the Hemstock and Gale Westfall transcripts, would you

8 have expected them as your lawyers -- as Engelhard's

9 lawyers to disclose those deposition transcripts to

10 you when coordinating the responses to Interrogatory

11 Number 63?")

12 A. So I have to assume they had -- assume

13 that the lawyer working on -- assuming the division of

14 labor between Tony Paduano's firm and Cahill was such

15 that a Cahill lawyer was looking at these

16 Interrogatories, that it was the same Cahill lawyer

17 who knew about the Affidavits or the -- excuse me --

18 the -- deposition transcripts and -- and make some

19 judgment about whether I'm supposed to make my

20 judgment about whether there was any privilege or not

21 and then answer?

22 I -- it seems -- it's -- I can't do it.

23 It's too much.

24 Q. Well, we saw the -- Exhibit 3, the

25 Hemstock deposition Peter Sloane was present for,

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 131 of 218 PageID:

44050
Page 131

1 right?

2 MR. BRESS: Objection.

3 Q. He was on the Appearance list?

4 A. We can -- I don't remember that. I --

5 Q. Would you like to look at that again?

6 A. If you want, sure.

7 MR. DONOHUE: Exhibit 3.

8 A. So this is deposition -- this is Peter

9 Sloane. Okay.

10 Yes. He was on -- yes, he was on the

11 appearances for the Hemstock deposition we looked at.

12 Q. And do you recall that Peter Sloane

13 helped coordinate with you these Answers To

14 Interrogatories?

15 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

16 MR. BRESS: Join.

17 A. And in -- in any specific case including

18 the Chernick case --

19 Q. Mm'mm.

20 A. -- I am not sure if Peter Sloane was

21 involved and I -- I hope -- I don't think I said that.

22 Cahill -- Cahill did provide counsel

23 referrals and they did maintain some records but, you

24 know, as to exactly who did what within Cahill on this

25 particular case I do not know.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 132 of 218 PageID:

44051
Page 132

1 Q. Sure. But Cahill, the law firm, knew

2 about the Hemstock deposition. Is that fair?

3 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

4 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

5 A. The only reason I know -- the only

6 reason I know anything about that is because you just

7 showed me the appearance by Peter Sloane in the

8 deposition.

9 Q. Right. And Cahill helped answer these

10 Interrogatories with the Paduano and Weintraub law

11 firm. Is that fair?

12 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

13 A. I -- yeah. I did ask Tony -- Tony

14 Paduano's firm to get information from Cahill and I

15 don't know anything about the division of labor that --

16 or the communications that occurred after that between

17 the two.

18 Q. So what information in these

19 Interrogatories would have been in the possession of

20 Paduano and Weintraub?

21 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

22 A. None that I know of.

23 Q. Right. All the information had to have

24 come from Cahill Gordon. Is that fair?

25 A. As far as I know.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 133 of 218 PageID:

44052
Page 133

1 Q. Right. So Cahill Gordon provided

2 Paduano Weintraub law firm with the information to

3 respond to these Interrogatories, correct?

4 A. I -- you know, I -- as far as I know,

5 yes.

6 Q. Right. So would you as the corporate

7 officer answering these Interrogatories that Cahill

8 provided the factual basis for expect that Cahill

9 would disclose the Hemstock deposition and the Gale

10 deposition when you answer Interrogatory Number 63?

11 MR. DONOHUE: Same objection to form.

12 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

13 MR. DONOHUE: Asked and answered.

14 A. And, again, I have to -- you -- you're

15 assuming...

16 I mean, I don't know who at Cahill

17 worked on what, who knew about the Hemstock deposition.

18 I don't know what if any privilege they might have

19 been considering. I just -- I don't know -- I don't

20 know as a factual matter what happened.

21 You're asking me I think to make some

22 guesses about what might have happened.

23 I could make guesses but it wouldn't be

24 knowledge.

25 Q. So I was going to go through all these --

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 134 of 218 PageID:

44053
Page 134

1 many of these Interrogatories and ask what the factual

2 basis was for the response.

3 Is it fair that you do not know what the

4 factual basis is for any response to these

5 Interrogatories that you coordinated the Answers for?

6 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

7 A. It -- it is fair to say that I don't

8 have firsthand knowledge of any of these responses I

9 believe and I haven't read the replies in detail.

10 Q. Mm'mm.

11 A. And I didn't -- I didn't recall them --

12 the -- I've just seen parts of them as of the last few

13 days but in general I didn't have any personal

14 knowledge of the talc business.

15 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Pat, I'm sorry.

16 Could you read back my question.

17 (Last question read back by the reporter.)

18 Q. Can you answer that question?

19 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

20 I think he did answer the question.

21 A. Yeah. Maybe I -- I don't know. Maybe I

22 misunderstood part of the question.

23 I didn't have personal knowledge of the

24 talc business.

25 My understanding was that information

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 135 of 218 PageID:

44054
Page 135

1 about the -- the talc business and the talc had been

2 collected at Cahill Gordon and the factual source that

3 I was -- the factual source that I was aware of would

4 have been that information.

5 Q. In answering these specific

6 Interrogatories no one at Cahill provided factual

7 information responses. Is that fair?

8 MR. BRESS: Objection --

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Wait. Scratch

10 that.

11 Q. Is it fair that --

12 MR. DONOHUE: You mean to say is it fair

13 to say?

14 Q. Is it fair to say that no one at

15 Engelhard provided factual information responding to

16 these Interrogatories?

17 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

18 A. Well, again, maybe I -- I haven't read

19 all those Interrogatories and I don't remember

20 anything about them from 16, 17 years ago, whenever it

21 was, but as it -- as it relates to the talc business

22 which I think is probably what you're interested in, I

23 don't recall doing any canvassing within Engelhard to

24 answer these Interrogatories.

25 Q. Do you know of -- not just these -- of

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 136 of 218 PageID:

44055
Page 136

1 any Interrogatories where Engelhard provided the

2 factual information that was called for in response?

3 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

4 A. Well, we're just talking about the --

5 you're not talking about litigation. You're just

6 talking about the handful of talc -- nontire worker

7 talc cases --

8 Q. Right.

9 A. -- I was involved with, right? Okay.

10 I -- I don't recall -- you know, other

11 than information I might have been able to provide

12 about when was the company incorporated or something,

13 but when we're talking about the talc business I don't

14 recall the -- you know, canvassing within the company

15 for information because I -- the business had been

16 closed for years, the mine had been closed for years.

17 My understanding was the information had

18 already been collected. I didn't -- I didn't think

19 there was anything to -- to get. It was different

20 than other litigations because of that.

21 Q. Right.

22 Cahill had the documents you said in

23 its --

24 A. I --

25 Q. -- possession?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 137 of 218 PageID:

44056
Page 137

1 A. My -- my understanding was Cahill had

2 the information on the talc business.

3 Q. And you never spoke to a former or

4 current employee to get information to respond to a

5 discovery response in a talc case. Is that fair?

6 A. That -- that is my recollection.

7 Q. Do you know whether Engelhard -- I mean,

8 do you know whether Cahill ever spoke to a current or

9 former employee to get information to respond to a

10 discovery request in a talc case?

11 A. Ever or the ones I handled?

12 Q. Well, let's start with the ones you

13 handled first.

14 A. Not that I know of.

15 Q. How about ever?

16 A. I don't have personal knowledge. I -- I

17 could surmise something but the short answer is I

18 don't know.

19 Q. Okay. Could we turn to Page 37, please,

20 or 36.

21 In response to Interrogatory Number 65

22 on Page 37 the first full paragraph, all right?

23 It says that...

24 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Next.

25 A. Page 37?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 138 of 218 PageID:

44057
Page 138

1 Q. Yeah.

2 A. The talc that Engelhard sold to Bondo?

3 Q. Exactly right.

4 A. Okay.

5 Q. It says, "The talc that Engelhard sold

6 to Bondo was sold through Engelhard's former

7 subsidiary Emtal later known as Pita. The only talc

8 mine operated by Emtal and accordingly Engelhard was

9 located in Johnson, Vermont. Emtal produced talc from

10 that mine from October 1967 when Emtal acquired the

11 mine until 1983 when the mine was closed for economic

12 reasons. A number of analysis of the Johnson mine

13 have been conducted and all of them have concluded

14 that the talc produced from this mine did not contain

15 asbestos."

16 Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. After reviewing the excerpts from the

19 Westfall deposition shown to you today is "a number of

20 analysis of the Johnson mine have been conducted and

21 all of them have concluded that talc produced from

22 this mine did not contain asbestos," is that a true

23 statement?

24 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

25 Foundation.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 139 of 218 PageID:

44058
Page 139

1 A. Well, at the time this Interrog -- at

2 the time of this response to the Interrogatories it

3 was true to my knowledge. It may be -- it may be

4 inconsistent with some of the stuff we looked at

5 earlier today.

6 Q. Mm'mm.

7 A. But I am not really an expert on

8 asbestos and I did not really read any of those things

9 fully or carefully so I'm not -- I'm not in a great

10 position to give you an opinion on whether it's true

11 in light of everything that everybody knows about

12 today except me basically.

13 Q. Right. I'm not saying that you knew

14 about that evidence when you -- when these

15 Interrogatories was coordinated.

16 A. Yeah, but I -- I -- it's hard for me to

17 assess the --

18 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.

19 Q. Sure.

20 A. Sorry.

21 Q. So I'm saying a number of analysis of

22 the Johnson mine have been conducted and all of them

23 have concluded that the talc produced from this mine

24 did not contain asbestos.

25 Knowing now that Engelhard scientists

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 140 of 218 PageID:

44059
Page 140

1 testified that they had found asbestos in the Johnson

2 mine do you believe that to be a true statement?

3 MR. BRESS: He's already answered this

4 question.

5 A. Again --

6 MR. BRESS: Objection to form and

7 foundation.

8 A. I looked at the stuff you showed me

9 earlier today and it suggests that there's more to

10 this than I realized 17 years ago, 16 -- whatever --

11 but I -- I'm not an expert. I don't know of looking

12 at three paragraphs in an 80-page pile is enough to --

13 for me to start drawing conclusions.

14 Q. Okay. And it's fair to say that in your

15 plain reading of this Interrogatory there is no

16 equivocation in that sentence?

17 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

18 MR. DONOHUE: Object.

19 MR. BRESS: Now I think you're -- you're

20 crossing the line into getting him to interpret an

21 offer work product of -- of this document.

22 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: A work product

23 that was -- that he coordinated the Answers to and was

24 served by Engelhard and served in litigation?

25 MR. BRESS: If you want to try to -- if

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 141 of 218 PageID:

44060
Page 141

1 you want to try to rephrase the question a different

2 way, but I think now you're starting to -- you're

3 before asking him hypotheticals. You're assuming

4 facts. You're asking him to assume facts that he

5 doesn't know.

6 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I'm not asking --

7 MR. BRESS: Now you're asking him a

8 different type of question.

9 You're asking him for -- for something --

10 for his mental impressions and legal judgment on

11 something that was written.

12 We've let you go on with the

13 hypotheticals which are completely improper. We've

14 let you asked them. We've given you plenty of time to

15 ask them and he's done his best to answer, but I think

16 now you're turning the corner and you need to rephrase

17 the question or more likely engage in a more line -- a

18 different line of questioning because this question to

19 me is not appropriate.

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Is that a form or

21 foundation objection?

22 MR. BRESS: I've objected --

23 MR. DONOHUE: Form.

24 MR. BRESS: -- on a work product and

25 form and foundation.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 142 of 218 PageID:

44061
Page 142

1 If there's a way to rephrase the

2 question --

3 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: So are you not

4 going to allow him to answer the question?

5 MR. BRESS: What is the question again?

6 Q. The question is in this sentence a

7 number of analysis of the Johnson mine have been

8 conducted and all of them have concluded that the talc

9 produced from this mine do not contain asbestos.

10 Is there any equivocation in that

11 statement?

12 MR. BRESS: You're -- hold on a second.

13 (Pause.)

14 MR. DONOHUE: The problem I have with it

15 is it's argumentative and it -- it's asking for his

16 opinion of somebody else's sentence if there's

17 equivocation, right? I mean, how evidential is that

18 or likely to lead to evidence?

19 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Well, I'm not

20 trying to be -- I'm not trying to be argumentative

21 with Mr. Hassett at all and I understand --

22 THE WITNESS: You've been very courteous

23 about that. I'm not complaining.

24 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I understand that

25 he did not write this. I'm not even sure if he ever

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 143 of 218 PageID:

44062
Page 143

1 saw it before it was served so I'm just asking because

2 he was the corporate officer who was supposed to be

3 responding to these Interrogatories -- and my

4 understanding of Interrogatories is they have to be

5 certified or responded to by the client and not a

6 lawyer. I want to know if there's any equivocation in

7 that sentence.

8 MR. DONOHUE: Well, my understanding is

9 that's not what happened in this case; that somebody

10 else certified the Answers.

11 So the questions you're asking about

12 whether this witness can interpret a sentence that

13 somebody else apparently wrote is an improper

14 question.

15 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Well, I don't

16 know. He -- I don't need to argue --

17 MR. DONOHUE: He didn't certify it, Jared.

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yeah, but he

19 worked with -- in conjunction with Engelhard --

20 MR. DONOHUE: And he told you what that

21 limited role was. Come on.

22 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay.

23 THE WITNESS: Doesn't the thing sort of

24 speak for itself anyway?

25 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Can I have my

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 144 of 218 PageID:

44063
Page 144

1 question back one more time. Sorry.

2 (The following question is read back by

3 the reporter:

4 "Question: The question is in this

5 sentence a number of analysis of the Johnson mine have

6 been conducted and all of them have concluded that the

7 talc produced from this mine do not contain asbestos.

8 Is there any equivocation in that statement?"}

9 MR. BRESS: So, look. If you're going

10 to -- if you're going to persist I got to take a quick

11 break.

12 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: What's the break?

13 Is it discussing a privilege issue?

14 MR. BRESS: I need to think about the

15 privilege issue, yeah, so I need to take a quick

16 break.

17 This is all improper questioning. It's

18 not asking anybody's factual knowledge or anything.

19 It's asking him for some kind of legal opinion,

20 possibly work product. So let me go off the record.

21 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Fine.

22 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 3 p.m.

23 Off the record.

24 (Recess taken at 3:00 p.m.)

25 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is now 3:04

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 145 of 218 PageID:

44064
Page 145

1 p.m. On the record.

2 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Before -- I

3 believe before the break there was a question pending,

4 Pat. Can you read that back for us, please.

5 (Same last question read back by the

6 reporter.)

7 MR. BRESS: So are you asking him for

8 his mental impressions of the statement?

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I think the

10 question stands.

11 MR. BRESS: So what are you asking for

12 if you're not asking for his mental impressions?

13 That's the -- that's the issue I'm having because I

14 don't understand how he can answer that question without

15 giving you his mental impressions so the question to

16 you is what are you asking for here?

17 Q. Mr. Hassett, do you understand my

18 question?

19 MR. BRESS: Well, that's --

20 A. I believe I understand the question.

21 Q. Are you able to answer my question?

22 A. Yes, I could answer the question.

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Are you going to

24 let him answer the question?

25 MR. BRESS: But I've asked you my

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 146 of 218 PageID:

44065
Page 146

1 question which is --

2 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I'm asking the

3 questions here.

4 MR. BRESS: Well, I've asked for

5 clarification on the question because I --

6 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: He understands

7 the question.

8 MR. BRESS: That's not the issue.

9 The issue is that the question I think

10 is asking for his mental impression.

11 I've asked you to clarify how it -- how

12 it may not be and you haven't done so so on that basis

13 I have to instruct him not to answer.

14 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay.

15 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

16 Q. But for that instruction you would be

17 able to answer the question. Is that fair?

18 A. If I -- I think so.

19 Q. Okay. All right.

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Before I go any

21 further how much time will you need?

22 MR. BRESS: I'm not planning to...

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay.

24 Here's 24.

25 MR. DONOHUE: I need about two hours.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 147 of 218 PageID:

44066
Page 147

1 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: And, Tony, do you

2 need any time?

3 MR. VALE: To ask questions?

4 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yeah.

5 MR. VALE: I don't think so.

6 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Okay.

7 MR. VALE: I'm sorry. What -- what was

8 your answer, Dan?

9 MR. BRESS: I'm -- I'm not planning to.

10 See what happens with the rest.

11 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Tony, you want a

12 copy of this?

13 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

14 Q. In front of you, Mr. Hassett, is what's

15 been marked as Exhibit 124 for identification and it's

16 a May 3rd, 2002 letter from Gideon Mark to Mark Strauss.

17 Do you see that?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Have you ever seen this letter before

20 today?

21 A. It -- I don't remember it.

22 Q. Okay. This letter's dated May 3rd,

23 2002. So about three weeks after the Interrogatories

24 were verified and served that we just discussed in

25 Exhibit 57.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 148 of 218 PageID:

44067
Page 148

1 A. The letter comes after the

2 Interrogatories.

3 Q. Right.

4 A. Okay.

5 Q. The first paragraph of the letter,

6 Exhibit 124, it says, "As you know prior to that

7 conference" -- this is the third sentence -- "we had

8 furnished various materials to you which we believe

9 conclusively demonstrates that the talc supplied to

10 Bondo by Engelhard Corporation, Engelhard, or its

11 former subsidiaries contained no asbestos. These

12 materials were supplied, summarized in Engelhard's

13 responses to your claim -- client's First Standard Set

14 of Liability Interrogatories," and then it lists

15 certain documents.

16 Do you see that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And then if you go down to the third

19 paragraph, the last paragraph on the page, it says,

20 "Your letter" -- referring to I guess a letter from

21 the early Strauss firm -- "identifies five types of

22 sales by Emtal; Emtal Bulk (T), Emtal 40190 up to

23 1985, Emtal 42 talc bags, Emtal 500 and Emtal 42 Bulk?

24 "Engelhard does not deny that sales of

25 these products from Emtal to Bondo occurred but there

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 149 of 218 PageID:

44068
Page 149

1 is absolutely no evidence that this talc contained

2 asbestos regardless of how long it might have been

3 held in inventory by Bondo."

4 Did I read that correctly?

5 A. I read it the same way you do.

6 Q. Based on -- after -- scratch that.

7 After reviewing the excerpts from the

8 Hemstock and Gale Westfall depositions that we

9 discussed this morning is that a true statement?

10 MR. DONOHUE: Object to form.

11 MR. BRESS: Object to form.

12 Once again, are you asking him for his

13 mental impressions as a lawyer? Because I don't

14 understand how the question wouldn't call for that.

15 Q. What is your understanding of absolutely

16 no evidence, Mr. Hassett?

17 MR. BRESS: That's the same -- the same

18 question, Jared. Are you asking him for his mental

19 impressions as a lawyer?

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I'm asking for

21 his plain reading and understanding of the words

22 "absolutely no evidence."

23 You tell me what legal impressions or

24 mental impressions are needed to read that statement.

25 MR. BRESS: Well, the problem is that

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 150 of 218 PageID:

44069
Page 150

1 you're deposing a former in-house lawyer about a

2 statement made in litigation so it -- it's -- it's

3 hard -- it's necessarily asking for that unless you

4 can explain to me how it's not.

5 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Right. That was

6 served to a plaintiff's counsel.

7 MR. BRESS: He's not on --

8 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: It's not --

9 MR. BRESS: -- this letter.

10 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: -- internal.

11 MR. BRESS: He didn't write this letter.

12 Q. Right. What is your understanding of

13 the words "absolutely no evidence," Mr. Hassett?

14 MR. BRESS: Are you asking as a general

15 matter --

16 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yes.

17 MR. BRESS: -- or in the context of

18 this --

19 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yes.

20 MR. DONOHUE: As a general matter.

21 A. As a general matter, absolutely no

22 evidence would mean no material information that would

23 tend to prove whatever proposition was in issue.

24 Q. So if a letter says absolutely no

25 evidence that Emtal talc contained asbestos, as a

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 151 of 218 PageID:

44070
Page 151

1 general matter does that mean to you that there was

2 asbestos but below a certain threshold?

3 MR. BRESS: Objection to form. I think

4 you're now asking for some kind of legal opinion or

5 legal judgment. I need to understand how you're not

6 so explain to me --

7 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I asked as a

8 general matter. What does no -- no evidence mean? Is

9 it...

10 MR. DONOHUE: No. No. You added

11 something at the end there.

12 Q. Does absolutely no evidence as a general

13 matter mean no reliable evidence?

14 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

15 Again, are you asking...

16 A. Tony's ready to eat his magic marker

17 down there. We got to do something.

18 MR. VALE: I'm keeping my mouth shut.

19 MR. BRESS: What's the question, Jared?

20 (The following question is read back by

21 the reporter:

22 "Question: Does absolutely no evidence

23 as a general matter mean no reliable evidence?")

24 MR. BRESS: Again, Jared, are you asking

25 him to form some kind of legal judgment or legal

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 152 of 218 PageID:

44071
Page 152

1 opinion here? Because it's -- it's hard to understand

2 how -- when you're questioning an in-house lawyer

3 about this particular statement that's what you're --

4 seems what you're getting at.

5 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Are you going to

6 instruct him not to answer?

7 MR. BRESS: Well, I asked you to give

8 me a --

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: This is my

10 question. Are you instructing him not to answer?

11 MR. BRESS: So are you -- are you saying

12 that you're asking for something other than a mental

13 impression?

14 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I asked my

15 question. You could either instruct him not to answer

16 or not.

17 MR. BRESS: Based on the way you phrase

18 the question I'm not sure how I can allow him to

19 answer without revealing mental impression.

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: That's fine.

21 Q. But for the instruction not to answer

22 could you answer my question, Mr. Hassett?

23 A. The question was is -- I'm sorry. Hang

24 on a second.

25 MR. DONOHUE: The question was does

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 153 of 218 PageID:

44072
Page 153

1 absolutely no evidence mean no reliable evidence? Or

2 words to that effect.

3 THE WITNESS: Yeah.

4 MR. DONOHUE: Mr. Placitella said it

5 much nicer.

6 A. I believe I could answer that.

7 Q. What was intended by Engelhard when it

8 states there's absolutely no evidence that this talc

9 contained asbestos?

10 MR. DONOHUE: I'm going to object to the

11 form of the question.

12 MR. BRESS: I need to object to the form

13 of the question and I don't -- you have to let us know

14 if you can answer that question without disclosing

15 privileged information.

16 A. Well, the only way I could answer the

17 question would be just to interpret the letter with

18 the same information that anyone who has got the

19 letter in front of them has.

20 I mean, I'm not -- you know, I don't --

21 I don't have any recollection of this particular

22 letter or any discussion that led up to it.

23 I -- I don't have a -- I don't have a

24 particular -- I don't have a factual gloss to offer on

25 top of the -- the language of the letter itself.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 154 of 218 PageID:

44073
Page 154

1 Q. Okay. Do you know what the factual

2 source of that representation is?

3 MR. BRESS: Again, I would instruct you

4 you can -- not to reveal privileged communications in

5 the course of answering that question so you can

6 answer it to the extent you can.

7 A. You know, the only -- I -- I believe I

8 directed the Paduano Weintraub firm to communicate

9 with Cahill for the factual background materials and

10 beyond that I have no recollection of -- of any other

11 specific involvement in providing or -- being the

12 middleman in any exchange of factual information.

13 Q. How you doing? All right? I'm going to

14 switch gears. Do you want to take a break or are you

15 okay to keep going?

16 A. I'm okay for awhile.

17 Hey, I'm not answering any of the

18 questions. It's easy.

19 MR. VALE: Not through the lack of...

20 Q. Earlier we talked a little bit about the

21 Martin case. Do you recall that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And during your time in the house

24 counsel's office at Engelhard you worked on the Martin

25 case?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 155 of 218 PageID:

44074
Page 155

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And what was your role and

3 responsibilities in the context of defending the

4 Martin case?

5 A. Well, I don't actually remember how the

6 case was initiated, whether there was a complaint or a

7 letter, whatever, and I -- I know I -- we had local

8 counsel, Howard Merten.

9 The case was a Rhode Island case.

10 Howard Merten was local counsel in Rhode Island. I

11 don't really remember the exact process that led to

12 his retention.

13 Early in the case there was a I believe

14 mandatory mediation that required the attendance of

15 the company representative and I -- and I attended as

16 the company representative.

17 You know, that -- that describes most of

18 my role there.

19 If you have more specifics I can try to

20 respond.

21 Q. Sure.

22 In front of you, Mr. Hassett, is what

23 I've marked as Exhibit 60 for identification. They

24 are Defendant Eastern Magnesia Talc Company's Answers

25 to Plaintiff's Interrogatories in the Martin case

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 156 of 218 PageID:

44075
Page 156

1 dated I believe August 22nd, 2002?

2 Do you see that?

3 A. Yup.

4 Q. During your defense of the Martin case

5 do you recall reviewing Engelhard's Answers To

6 Interrogatories?

7 A. I do not remember this specifically.

8 No, I don't. I'm not saying it didn't happen. I

9 don't remember it.

10 Q. Sure.

11 Turn to Interrogatory Number 3.

12 It says, "State the names of each person

13 who was spoken to or who provided information to

14 assist in answering these Interrogatories."

15 Do you see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And the Answer is "Defendant's counsel

18 assisted in answering these Interrogatories."

19 Do you know who defendant's counsel is?

20 A. In that sentence I do not.

21 Q. Would that be you?

22 A. I don't know.

23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Sir, you're covering

24 your microphone.

25 THE WITNESS: Sorry.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 157 of 218 PageID:

44076
Page 157

1 Q. And if we turn to the preliminary

2 statement it says on the second sentence, "Pita

3 formerly known as Eastern Magnesia Talc Company was

4 engaged in the mining and milling of talc from a

5 single mine located in Johnson, Vermont, from 1967 to

6 1983. Talc from this mine did not contain asbestos

7 and was not fibrous in nature."

8 Do you see that?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What is the factual source or the

11 factual basis for the statement "the talc from this

12 mine did not contain asbestos" --

13 MR. DONOHUE: Object --

14 Q. -- "was not fibrous in nature"?

15 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

16 MR. BRESS: And I would just --

17 MR. DONOHUE: And foundation.

18 MR. BRESS: I would just caution you,

19 Mr. Hassett, not to reveal any privileged

20 communication so you should answer without providing

21 that information.

22 A. Well, I don't remember or don't know the

23 source for that information.

24 MR. DONOHUE: Okay.

25 Q. Did it come from your personal

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 158 of 218 PageID:

44077
Page 158

1 knowledge?

2 MR. DONOHUE: Objection.

3 THE WITNESS: Should I answer if I --

4 MR. DONOHUE: Yes.

5 A. No.

6 Q. The next sentence says, "Pita has

7 already provided plaintiff's counsel with various

8 documentation of this fact including the Ashton

9 Affidavit and supporting documents."

10 Do you see that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Whose decision was it to provide the

13 Ashton Affidavit and supporting documents to the

14 plaintiff's counsel?

15 A. I don't know.

16 Q. Was it your decision?

17 A. I don't remember.

18 Q. Would it have been authorized by

19 Engelhard?

20 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

21 MR. DONOHUE: Object to form.

22 A. I -- I don't remember the decision and I

23 can't remember any specifics of authorization or

24 anything else about it. I just -- I don't know.

25 Q. Okay. Go to the second paragraph.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 159 of 218 PageID:

44078
Page 159

1 The first whole paragraph on the second

2 page. The second sentence says, "The plant manager

3 for those operations is deceased and no one directly

4 involved with those operations is currently in Pita's

5 employ."

6 Do you see that?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Do you know who the plant manager was?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Would it be Howard Shafer?

11 A. I don't know.

12 Q. Okay. Can you review these

13 Interrogatories and tell me which Answers Engelhard

14 provided the factual basis for?

15 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form and

16 foundation.

17 MR. BRESS: Join.

18 Q. If any?

19 A. Yeah. I just -- I don't remember

20 anything about preparing these Interrogatories at all.

21 I mean, when you asked me about my role in the case I

22 jumped from opening letter, a Complaint, to mediation.

23 That was because that's what I remember.

24 I -- I just -- I don't know what -- I

25 don't -- I don't remember what came from Engelhard or

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 160 of 218 PageID:

44079
Page 160

1 any other particular source.

2 Q. Who would know the answer to that

3 question?

4 A. Well, I don't really remember anything

5 from preparing or putting these in. You know, maybe --

6 I see Craig Stoneback and Howard Merten are on here as

7 verifying and signing as to objections. They may

8 remember more than I do. I don't know.

9 Q. Did you ever work with Craig Stoneback

10 in responding to Interrogatories?

11 A. Not that I recall but...

12 Q. Do you know if Cahill or Engelhard's

13 local counsel had direct access to Engelhard

14 executives like Mr. Stoneback?

15 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

16 A. Yeah. I -- I don't recall any but I

17 don't know for sure in -- are you talking about this

18 case or just in general?

19 Q. In general.

20 A. To Stoneback.

21 I still can't recall any.

22 (Pause.)

23 MR. DONOHUE: Thank you.

24 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Tony?

25 Q. Mr. Hassett, in front of you is what's

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 161 of 218 PageID:

44080
Page 161

1 been marked as Exhibit 205 for identification. It is

2 plaintiff Theresa Martin's More Responsive Answers To

3 Interrogatories propounded by Eastern Magnesia Company

4 in the Martin case and it's dated June 10th, 2004

5 Bates number 334310 through 334316.

6 Do you see that?

7 A. I'm sorry. I lost focus there for a

8 second.

9 See which specific part of this?

10 Q. Well, have you ever seen these Answers

11 before?

12 A. I don't remember them.

13 Q. Okay. I want to turn your attention to

14 Page 2 which is the More Responsive Answer to

15 Interrogatory 15.

16 You see that? It's...

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. The -- the paragraph that begins with

19 "Analysis was performed"?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. It says, "Analysis was performed in 1983

22 on talc samples from the Johnson mine by Dr. William

23 Glassley, a geologist at Middlebury College. Mr.

24 Glassley collected talc samples from the Johnson mine

25 and identified asbestiform chrysotile which occurred

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 162 of 218 PageID:

44081
Page 162

1 in aggregates forming small flakes. The small flakes

2 were observed in talc samples from the Johnson mine by

3 Mr. Glassley. He examined the rocks. The

4 petrographic and electron micro -- microbe (sic) was

5 used by Rudolph Van Huene in Pasadena, California."

6 Did I read that correctly?

7 A. You -- well, I think there's a typo in

8 here which is fairly hard to read -- but microprobe or

9 whatever but -- but, yes.

10 Q. I struggled with that.

11 Earlier in today's deposition when you

12 said in the context of the Martin case you became

13 aware that plaintiff have retained an expert who was

14 ready to opine that he found asbestos in the Johnson

15 mine. Is this what you were referring to?

16 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

17 A. No. My recollection was not as specific

18 as this.

19 I -- I was not referring to this item.

20 Q. When did you first become aware that Dr.

21 Glassley found -- reported finding asbestos in the

22 Johnson mine?

23 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

24 MR. BRESS: Join.

25 A. Yeah. I -- I do not remember the name

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 163 of 218 PageID:

44082
Page 163

1 Glassley from back in 2004 and I didn't remember the

2 specifics of these responses.

3 I -- and I -- I don't remember how

4 exactly I first learned of how or when I first learned

5 of plaintiff's assertion that they had some sort of

6 expert so I -- you know, when -- other than just

7 saying it was within the context of the Martin case I

8 can't nail down the time any more carefully.

9 Q. Was the fact that the plaintiff in

10 Martin had an expert who was prepared to opine that he

11 found asbestos in the Johnson mine discussed within

12 Engelhard?

13 MR. BRESS: So...

14 Q. No specific conversations. Was it

15 discussed?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Was Cahill aware that the plaintiffs

18 counsel in the Martin case had purportedly found an

19 expert who was ready to opine that he found asbestos

20 in the Johnson mine?

21 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

22 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

23 A. I don't know.

24 Q. Was the fact that the plaintiff's expert

25 in the Martin case had retained an expert who had

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 164 of 218 PageID:

44083
Page 164

1 found or purported to find asbestos in the Johnson

2 mine ever discussed with any Cahill personnel?

3 A. By me?

4 Q. By you.

5 A. I don't -- I don't recall specific -- I

6 don't specifically recall any discussion with Cahill --

7 with anyone from Cahill.

8 Q. Do you know if any other personnel at

9 Engelhard discussed the fact that the plaintiffs

10 counsel in the Martin case retained an expert who

11 purported to find asbestos in the Johnson mine with --

12 was that discussion had with anybody in Cahill?

13 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

14 A. Yeah. I don't know of any such

15 discussion.

16 Q. Did Engelhard have any discussions with

17 the local defense lawyer that the plaintiffs expert in

18 the Martin case purported to find asbestos in the

19 Johnson mine?

20 MR. DONOHUE: That's a yes or no in

21 order to protect any privilege.

22 MR. BRESS: I would say the same thing.

23 A. Okay. I need -- I need to hear that

24 question again.

25 (Last question read back by the reporter.)

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 165 of 218 PageID:

44084
Page 165

1 MR. BRESS: Objection to form as well.

2 A. Well -- yes.

3 Q. Without revealing specific

4 communications who did you discuss with the fact that

5 the plaintiffs counsel in the Martin case retained an

6 expert who purported to find asbestos in the Johnson

7 mine?

8 MR. DONOHUE: Object to form. You can

9 answer.

10 A. Who within local counsel or who -- who --

11 Q. Who within Engelhard?

12 MR. BRESS: You're asking who within

13 Engelhard talked to local counsel?

14 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Scratch that.

15 Q. Who did you -- within Engelhard who did

16 you discuss with the fact that the plaintiffs counsel

17 in the Martin case had retained an expert who

18 purported to find asbestos in the Johnson mine?

19 A. I don't -- I discussed the case with

20 Arthur Dornbusch. I don't -- I don't know about the

21 retention of the expert but we -- the --

22 MR. BRESS: Don't reveal any

23 communications with Arthur.

24 I think he just asked you did you --

25 A. Yes. Arthur -- Arthur Dornbusch.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 166 of 218 PageID:

44085
Page 166

1 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Just to make it

2 clear.

3 Q. Did you discuss the fact that the

4 plaintiffs expert in the Martin case purported to find

5 asbestos in the Johnson mine with Arthur Dornbusch?

6 THE WITNESS: Could I -- am I --

7 MR. DONOHUE: Yes or no?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Do you recall how you were made aware of

10 the fact that the plaintiff's counsel in the Martin

11 case -- the plaintiffs expert in the Martin case

12 purported to find asbestos of Emtal talc?

13 MR. DONOHUE: I'm going to caution him

14 not to reveal any privileged communications with his

15 counsel.

16 MR. BRESS: Same instruction.

17 A. Well, I don't recall how I learned it

18 so...

19 Q. Do you recall that Dr. Glassley served

20 an expert report in the Martin case?

21 A. No.

22 (Pause.)

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sorry. I only

24 have two.

25 MR. DONOHUE: Thanks.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 167 of 218 PageID:

44086
Page 167

1 Q. Mr. Hassett, in front of you is what's

2 been marked as Exhibit 14 for identification and it's

3 Bates stamped beginning Lopez 2166 (sic) to 21681.

4 Can you please review this document and

5 let me know if you recall seeing it before?

6 (Pause.)

7 A. I do not recall seeing this document

8 before.

9 Q. Okay.

10 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: For the record

11 it's titled Summary Of Activities Related To Services

12 Rendered For Decof and Grimm in the case of David H.

13 Westfall versus Whittaker, Clark and Daniels.

14 And, Mr. Hassett, if you see -- if you

15 go to the first sentence it says, "On November 7th,

16 Sunday, 1982 I drove to the Johnson talc mine from

17 Middlebury, Vermont. I collected a suite of samples

18 of talc ore, talc-carbonate grit, serpentine,

19 blackwall and schist from the large mine tailings dump

20 adjacent to the mine operation."

21 Do you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And if you go to Page 5, the Conclusion.

24 It says, "Asbestiform chrysotile occurs

25 in serpentine intermingled with talc at the Johnson

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 168 of 218 PageID:

44087
Page 168

1 mine."

2 Do you see that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you recall whether this report is

5 something that was discussed within Engelhard?

6 A. I do not recall any discussion of this

7 report.

8 Q. Do you recall any discussions of this

9 report with Cahill Gordon?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Do you recall any discussions of this

12 report with the local defense counsel, Mr. Merten?

13 A. No.

14 (Pause.)

15 MR. VALE: Thank you.

16 Q. Mr. Hassett, in front of you is now

17 what's been marked as Exhibit Hassett-10 for

18 identification. It is an August 2nd, 2004 letter from

19 Howard Merten to Elizabeth Cuzzone.

20 Do you see that?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. It also has some attachments.

23 MR. DONOHUE: I should say.

24 Q. Do you recall that Elizabeth Cuzzone was

25 that the plaintiff's lawyer in the Martin case?

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 169 of 218 PageID:

44088
Page 169

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And do you see that the letter is dated

3 August 2nd, 2004 which is about six weeks -- almost

4 six, seven weeks after the Interrogatories that we

5 reviewed previously were certified; the

6 Interrogatories at Exhibit 205?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And if we turn to the last paragraph of

9 the letter Mr. Merten says, "With the body of

10 independent and consistent evidence Engelhard is

11 confident that a jury would find that the talc from

12 the Johnson mine is and was asbestos-free. That said,

13 Engelhard is willing to make some adjustment in its

14 settlement position in light of the increased defense

15 costs it appears it will likely face. At this point

16 I'm not sure where you stand on a demand. Please give

17 me a call to discuss the matters raised in this letter

18 and the possible resolution of this matter."

19 Do you see that?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Do you recall that once Engelhard was

22 presented with the fact that the plaintiffs counsel in

23 the Martin case had found asbestos in the Johnson mine

24 it was willing to adjust its settlement position?

25 MR. BRESS: Objection. Form.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 170 of 218 PageID:

44089
Page 170

1 A. I don't remember this specific letter,

2 but I do the remember we -- it did -- it tried to

3 reach a settlement with the plaintiff in the Martin's

4 case.

5 Q. And is it fair to say that that attempt

6 to seek a settlement in the Martin case came after the

7 fact was presented that the plaintiffs expert in the

8 Martin case purported to have found asbestos in the

9 Johnson mine?

10 MR. BRESS: Do you understand the

11 question?

12 A. Well, it's the chronology of which came

13 first, the --

14 Q. Mm'mm.

15 A. -- evidence or the settlement, and I --

16 I don't really remember. I mean, you know, the

17 correspondence suggested it but I don't remember.

18 Q. All right. You said that in the Martin

19 case you participated in a mediation as the corporate

20 representative. Is that fair?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Do you recall about time-wise when that

23 mediation was? Date?

24 A. You know, beyond -- beyond knowing it

25 was the Martin case so I can place it in this era, no,

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 171 of 218 PageID:

44090
Page 171

1 I couldn't give you a date.

2 Q. Well, was it disclosed in the mediation

3 that the -- the fact that the plaintiffs counsel had

4 an expert who purported to find asbestos in the

5 Johnson mine?

6 MR. BRESS: I'm sorry. I'm not sure I

7 follow -- was it disclosed by the plaintiff?

8 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Right.

9 A. Well, I didn't speak -- other than a

10 brief introduction and good-bye, I didn't speak

11 directly to the plaintiff or even the plaintiff's

12 counsel in the mediation and I don't know if the

13 information about the expert evidence -- I don't

14 remember when it was dis -- it was known at that time

15 if not disclosed at that time.

16 Q. Okay. So fair to say that in the

17 mediation it was addressed the fact that -- well,

18 scratch that.

19 Is it fair to say that in the -- in the

20 mediation the fact that the plaintiffs lawyer had an

21 expert who purported to find asbestos in the Johnson

22 mine was discussed?

23 A. Well, we have my discussions with local

24 counsel which are privileged and the discussions that

25 plaintiff -- the plaintiffs counsel had with Mr.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 172 of 218 PageID:

44091
Page 172

1 Merten which I wasn't there for.

2 Q. Right. Did Mr. Merten ever tell you

3 about -- scratch that.

4 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: That's why I said

5 scratch that.

6 MR. DONOHUE: That was good. Save a

7 page of transcript.

8 Q. Do you recall how that mediation

9 resolved?

10 A. The mediation did not resolve the case.

11 I'm not sure how much more I can say

12 without getting into some privilege issues.

13 Q. So do you recall the circumstances in

14 which the case resolved if it was not at mediation?

15 MR. BRESS: You can answer that I think.

16 Just don't reveal privileged communications in the

17 course of doing so.

18 A. Well, ultimately the case was resolved

19 by settlement.

20 Q. I'm going to turn back to Exhibit

21 Hassett-10 for a minute; the one in front of you.

22 The first sentence of the last paragraph

23 on Page 2 has an opening clause and says, "Engelhard

24 is confident that any jury would find that talc from

25 the Johnson mine is and was asbestos-free."

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 173 of 218 PageID:

44092
Page 173

1 Do you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Did Engelhard expect that it would not

4 be able to prevail on Summary Judgment on the question

5 of whether Emtal talc contained asbestos?

6 MR. BRESS: So there I think you are

7 asking -- asking for work product and mental

8 impressions and very likely attorney-client

9 communications so I think you have to explain to us

10 how -- how you think he could answer that without

11 revealing that information.

12 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sure.

13 Q. In communicating that sentence to Miss

14 Cuzzone do you know if that's what Mr. Howard Merten

15 intended?

16 MR. BRESS: Intended what?

17 Q. What -- do you know what that sentence

18 means?

19 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

20 MR. DONOHUE: Same.

21 A. Yeah. I -- I don't really know the

22 specifics of Howard's intention in this letter.

23 Q. Okay.

24 A. I don't -- I don't remember -- remember

25 the letter.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 174 of 218 PageID:

44093
Page 174

1 Q. Do you recall what the terms were of the

2 Martin settlement?

3 A. I believe Engelhard ended up paying

4 approximately 400,000 but I -- that's not a rock solid

5 number.

6 Q. And to your knowledge had Engelhard ever

7 paid that much money to settle a talc case either a

8 tire worker case or other Emtal talc case before?

9 A. To my knowledge, no.

10 Q. After the Martin settlement was reached

11 until the time you left the company are you aware of

12 any other instance where Engelhard agreed to settle for

13 $400,000 in any talc case; tire worker or otherwise?

14 A. Well, if you -- I'm not aware of any

15 settlements and I'm not actually aware of any cases

16 after Martin.

17 (Pause.)

18 Q. Who had to approve the Martin settlement

19 within Engelhard?

20 A. Arthur Dornbusch.

21 Q. Would -- to your knowledge was that

22 settlement ever reported outside of the Legal

23 Department?

24 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

25 A. Well, I don't know. Reported is a --

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 175 of 218 PageID:

44094
Page 175

1 certainly other people in the company would have been

2 aware of the payment. Beyond that I don't -- I don't

3 know of any special reporting.

4 Q. Who within Engelhard would have been

5 aware of the payment?

6 A. I mean, I don't -- I don't know the

7 details. I -- you know, somebody had to cut the

8 checks, somebody had to -- had to log it in as a debit

9 or credit in the books.

10 It's just a -- routine stuff.

11 Q. Do you know whether the Martin

12 settlement was known to the Engelhard Board of

13 Directors?

14 A. I do not.

15 Q. I'm going to show you what I've marked

16 as Exhibit 7 for identification.

17 (Pause.)

18 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Tony?

19 For the record Exhibit 7 is a May 9th,

20 2006 cover letter from Elizabeth Cuzzone to Howard

21 Merten enclosing a settlement release in the Martin

22 case.

23 Q. Have you ever seen this cover letter and

24 release before?

25 A. I don't remember.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 176 of 218 PageID:

44095
Page 176

1 Q. And if you turn to the first page of the

2 release it says that -- you were right. It says that

3 the Martin case was resolved for $400,000.

4 Do you see that?

5 A. Yup.

6 Q. I want to direct your attention -- well,

7 first, I want to direct your attention to the --

8 begin -- the last sentence beginning on the second

9 page of the release.

10 (Pause.)

11 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: And I'm sorry.

12 For the record this is Hassett-7 if I didn't say that.

13 Q. The last sentence on this -- the second

14 page of the release continuing onto the third page

15 reads, "Finally, each of the parties agrees that he,

16 she or it will not disclose any of the facts related

17 to -- to the lawsuit to anyone including without

18 limitation the information contained in any discovery

19 documents and the facts related to the settlement

20 discussions surrounding this agreement."

21 Do you see that?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Why did Engelhard insist on that clause

24 in the agreement?

25 MR. BRESS: So --

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 177 of 218 PageID:

44096
Page 177

1 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

2 MR. BRESS: Yeah. I have to object to

3 form but I also think you're now asking for work

4 product and mental impressions since you're asking

5 this of an in-house lawyer so I think the question

6 needs to be rephrased. Maybe you can rephrase it?

7 Q. Well, let's start this way.

8 Did Engelhard insist that this clause be

9 in the settlement agreement?

10 A. I don't remember the negotiation around

11 inclusion of this clause at all or -- or the

12 communication that led to it.

13 Q. Under this agreement Elizabeth Cuzzone

14 is the plaintiffs lawyer, was -- her client was paid

15 $400,000 on the condition that she did not tell anyone

16 what Dr. Glassley had found. True?

17 MR. BRESS: Objection.

18 A. She was paid 400 --

19 MR. BRESS: Objection to the form.

20 THE WITNESS: Sorry.

21 MR. DONOHUE: Join.

22 THE WITNESS: Should -- should I answer?

23 MR. DONOHUE: Read it back, please.

24 (The following question is read back by

25 the reporter:

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 178 of 218 PageID:

44097
Page 178

1 "Question: Under this agreement

2 Elizabeth Cuzzone is the plaintiffs lawyer, was -- her

3 client was paid $400,000 on the condition that she did

4 not tell anyone what Dr. Glassley had found. True?")

5 MR. DONOHUE: Objection to form.

6 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Let me rephrase

7 that so it's clear.

8 Q. Miss Martin, Elizabeth Cuzzone's client,

9 was paid $400,000 by Engelhard on the condition that

10 Miss Martin or Elizabeth Cuzzone not tell anyone about

11 the fact that Dr. Glassley had found asbestos in the

12 Johnson mine.

13 MR. DONOHUE: Object to form.

14 Q. Isn't that true?

15 MR. BRESS: Objection to form but I also

16 think, Jared -- maybe there's a way to rephrase this

17 but I think you're asking him now to interpret as a

18 lawyer the settlement agreement.

19 Q. Mr. Hassett?

20 MR. BRESS: I think you're asking him to

21 give you his mental impressions.

22 Q. This is a contract that Engelhard

23 entered into with Miss Martin, correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And you worked in the Engelhard Legal

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 179 of 218 PageID:

44098
Page 179

1 Department during the time this contract was executed.

2 Is that fair?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Can you tell me what are the terms of

5 this contract as it pertains to the final sentence on

6 Page 2 going on to Page 3 and how that relates to the

7 payment that Miss Cuzzone -- that Miss Martin

8 received?

9 A. Well --

10 MR. DONOHUE: You can...

11 A. -- that clause and all the other

12 consideration mentioned on the side of Miss Martin in

13 the agreement were in exchange for the payment of

14 400,000.

15 Q. Right. And that's fair.

16 So part of the consideration for the

17 400,000 was that Miss Martin or Miss Cuzzone could not

18 tell anybody about the fact that Dr. Glassley had

19 found asbestos in the Johnson mine?

20 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form of the

21 question.

22 MR. BRESS: Yeah. Object as well. And

23 I think again, Jared, you're now asking him to provide

24 mental impressions and to interpret the agreement as a

25 former lawyer of the company.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 180 of 218 PageID:

44099
Page 180

1 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I want to know

2 his understanding.

3 Q. So you -- could you please answer that

4 question?

5 MR. BRESS: I'm sorry. You want -- but,

6 again, you're now -- you're now asking him to provide

7 you with his understanding from the time of whether a

8 particular clause covered something.

9 I don't understand how this isn't asking

10 for his mental impressions as a lawyer.

11 Q. Well, that clause precluded Miss Martin

12 from telling anyone about the fact that Dr. Glassley

13 had found asbestos in the Johnson mine. Is that true?

14 MR. BRESS: Again, I -- I think you're

15 asking him to provide his mental impressions as a

16 lawyer. Maybe the first question is whether he would

17 even know the answer to your question.

18 Q. I would like my answer, please.

19 MR. BRESS: Well, I need --

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: If you want to

21 instruct him not to answer that question you can

22 instruct him not to answer that question.

23 I'm asking him what is the effect of a

24 clause in the contract that a company that he used to

25 work for executed with Miss Martin.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 181 of 218 PageID:

44100
Page 181

1 MR. BRESS: Right. But you're asking

2 him as a lawyer from the company to provide what is

3 essentially a mental impression about --

4 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: No, it's --

5 MR. BRESS: -- in terms of an agreement.

6 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I'm not going to

7 get that question.

8 MR. BRESS: So maybe there's a -- a way,

9 Jared, to rephrase this or you can explain how you're

10 not asking for the mental impressions but...

11 Q. Engelhard would have the right to

12 enforce the terms of this contract. Is that correct,

13 Mr. Hassett?

14 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form. You

15 could answer.

16 MR. BRESS: Object to the form as well.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Right. And enforcing -- if Miss Cuzzone

19 told anyone about the fact that Dr. Glassley had found

20 asbestos in the Johnson mine would that be a violation

21 of this contract?

22 MR. BRESS: Now, I --

23 MR. DONOHUE: Object --

24 MR. BRESS: -- think you're asking him

25 again for a legal opinion on the meaning of this

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 182 of 218 PageID:

44101
Page 182

1 contract that draws on his mental impressions and work

2 product as a former Engelhard lawyer.

3 A. I also -- wasn't in the mine. It was in

4 the tailings which is some issue as to the validity of

5 the sample that creates a whole different

6 concentration but I think that's --

7 Q. So Dr. Glassley didn't even find

8 asbestos in the mine and Engelhard was willing to

9 pay --

10 A. The stuff --

11 Q. -- Miss Cuzzone --

12 A. -- I read -- the stuff --

13 Q. -- $400,000?

14 A. -- I read said he --

15 MR. DONOHUE: Whoa, whoa, whoa.

16 A. -- said he found it --

17 MR. DONOHUE: Two -- two people --

18 A. -- in the tailings.

19 MR. DONOHUE: -- talking at the same

20 time.

21 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Sorry.

22 A. This -- the material --

23 MR. DONOHUE: Wait. Wait.

24 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I'll withdraw my

25 question. I'll withdraw my question.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 183 of 218 PageID:

44102
Page 183

1 I apologize. I got my Italian up.

2 THE WITNESS: Well, we're -- we both

3 have had a -- everybody has had kind of a long day

4 here.

5 Q. So I just want the answer to this

6 question.

7 Did Miss Cuzzone told anyone about the

8 fact that Dr. Glassley had purported to find asbestos

9 in the Johnson mine would that be a violation of this

10 settlement agreement?

11 MR. BRESS: Jared, again, I don't -- I

12 think you need to explain how you're not asking for

13 his mental impressions as a lawyer here with this

14 question as phrased.

15 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: If you want to

16 the instruct him not to answer, then you're going to

17 instruct him not to answer.

18 I like my question as it's phrased.

19 MR. BRESS: Well, you haven't explained

20 how it's not --

21 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I don't need to

22 explain it so --

23 MR. BRESS: But I've asked for the

24 clarification to help --

25 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: No. Then no.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 184 of 218 PageID:

44103
Page 184

1 Answer --

2 MR. BRESS: -- in assessing the

3 instruction not to answer.

4 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: You have my

5 question. You make your decision whether you're going

6 to instruct him not to answer.

7 MR. BRESS: Yeah. You left me no choice

8 but to instruct him not to answer.

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: That's fine.

10 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

11 Q. But for the instruction not to answer

12 could you answer that question, Mr. Hassett?

13 A. Well, I think the --

14 Q. It's a yes or a no.

15 MR. BRESS: Or -- or you don't know.

16 There are other answers one can give. You should give

17 the correct one.

18 A. I -- I can -- I could answer that

19 question.

20 Q. During your experience in the Engelhard

21 in-house Legal Department had you ever seen a similar

22 clause to the sentence that's in the end of Page 2 and

23 into Page 3 in the context of an Emtal talc case?

24 A. I don't recall any others.

25 Q. And do you know when Miss Martin entered

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 185 of 218 PageID:

44104
Page 185

1 into this settlement agreement do you know whether she

2 even had the depositions from the Westfall case marked

3 as Exhibits 3 and 4 that we discussed today?

4 MR. BRESS: Objection to form.

5 A. I -- I -- if I understood the question I

6 do not know what Mrs. -- Mrs. Martin said or her

7 counsel.

8 Q. Okay. Besides this case, the Martin

9 case, what is the most amount of money that you know

10 of that Engelhard paid to settle an Emtal talc case?

11 A. I don't...

12 I don't -- I don't know the answer to

13 that.

14 Q. We saw today in Exhibit Hassett-5 which

15 was the correspondence between Michael Sullivan of the

16 Cahill firm and SherryLynn of the Bevin firm in the

17 context of the tire worker cases --

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. -- that those cases settled generally

20 for about a thousand dollars on average apiece. Is

21 that fair?

22 A. I saw that number in that

23 correspondence.

24 Q. And that would be the Martin -- the

25 settlement in the Martin case was 400 times more than

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 186 of 218 PageID:

44105
Page 186

1 the settlements discussed in -- in Exhibit

2 Hassett-5 --

3 MR. DONOHUE: Object to the form.

4 Q. -- true?

5 MR. BRESS: Object to the form.

6 A. You're asking me if 400,000 equals 400

7 times 1,000?

8 Q. Yes.

9 A. I believe that's correct.

10 Q. Okay.

11 MR. DONOHUE: Good job.

12 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: You know what?

13 Do you mind -- let's take a short break. Thanks.

14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 4:10 p.m.

15 We are off the record.

16 (Recess taken at 4:10 p.m.)

17 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 4:33 p.m.

18 On the record.

19 (Exhibit Hassett-1A marked for

20 identification.)

21 BY MR. JARED PLACITELLA:

22 Q. All right. Mr. Hassett, I'm showing you

23 what I've marked as Exhibit Hassett-1A for

24 identification.

25 A. Okay.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 187 of 218 PageID:

44106
Page 187

1 Q. You don't have it --

2 A. It's new.

3 Q. Yup.

4 A. Okay.

5 Q. I got one copy so we may have to

6 share but...

7 MR. BRESS: Can you publish it or maybe

8 you don't have that many questions?

9 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yeah.

10 THE WITNESS: Have to share.

11 MR. DONOHUE: Okay.

12 Q. In front of you is what I marked as

13 Exhibit Hassett-1A for identification.

14 MR. PRESS: Okay.

15 A. Okay.

16 Q. And it looks like a 1991 Engelhard

17 docket retention policy. Have you ever seen this

18 document before?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Okay. And did you see it in preparation

21 for today's deposition?

22 A. Possibly a different edition of the very

23 similar document. Possibly exactly the same.

24 Q. Now, this retention policy is dated

25 1991.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 188 of 218 PageID:

44107
Page 188

1 Are you aware of any other earlier

2 versions of an Engelhard document retention policy.

3 A. I can't remember when the updates

4 occurred. The policy existed before '91.

5 Q. Okay. Do you remember when the policy

6 was initially put in place?

7 A. I do not.

8 Q. Okay. Can you turn to Page 19 I believe

9 it is.

10 And I'm correct that should be the

11 litigation documents. Is that correct?

12 MR. BRESS: I need to see the document

13 real quick so can I...

14 A. Yeah. I -- I'm not getting -- maybe I

15 went to the wrong page. I'm not picking up the

16 litigation stuff.

17 MR. DONOHUE: What --

18 MR. BRESS: You're talking about --

19 MR. DONOHUE: -- are we looking at?

20 MR. BRESS: -- Page 18, Jared?

21 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: I think it's Page

22 19 if I -- but I could have just totally forgot.

23 MR. BRESS: This?

24 THE WITNESS: Yeah.

25 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: Yeah. Legal

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 189 of 218 PageID:

44108
Page 189

1 records. Page 18. Thank you. 18.

2 THE WITNESS: All right.

3 MR. DONOHUE: Good.

4 Q. Do you see where it says under Lawsuit/

5 Claims?

6 A. Yup.

7 Q. It says "AS plus 3." Do you know what

8 that means?

9 A. I don't remember.

10 Q. And then it says the exception is P --

11 oh, "precedent" and it says P. Do you see that?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. I'm assuming P means permanent? Is that

14 your understanding?

15 A. I don't really remember it. There's a

16 code in here somewhere if you want me to refresh my

17 recollection, fine.

18 Q. I was more interested, what's precedent

19 mean?

20 A. I don't know.

21 Q. Do you know who would know what -- what

22 lawsuit/claims files were precedent?

23 A. I -- I don't -- I do not know. I don't

24 remember this.

25 Q. Do you know who I could ask who would

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 190 of 218 PageID:

44109
Page 190

1 know?

2 A. Well, no. I mean, not anybody who's

3 still at the company. I don't know who's left so...

4 Q. I believe you said Al McWilliams had

5 knowledge about the document retention policies. Is

6 that fair?

7 A. Right.

8 Q. Do you recall anybody else either with

9 the company or used to be employed by the company who

10 would have knowledge of the document retention policy?

11 A. No.

12 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: That's all the

13 questions I have for now. I'll pass the witness.

14 MR. VALE: No questions.

15 MR. BRESS: Anybody on the phone?

16 MR. TUNIS: Nothing for Halket.

17 MR. PAVLICK: Nothing for Dornbusch.

18 MR. BRESS: Okay. I think we're

19 concluded.

20 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: All right. Thank

21 you very much --

22 MR. DONOHUE: Thank you all.

23 MR. JARED PLACITELLA: -- Mr. Hassett.

24 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This concludes the

25 deposition of Michael Hassett.

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 191 of 218 PageID:

44110
Page 191

1 The time is 4:38 p.m. We're off the

2 record.

3 (Reporter retains all exhibits except

4 Exhibit 7.)

5 (4:38 p.m.)

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 192 of 218 PageID:

44111
Page 192

1 CERTIFICATE OF OFFICER

2

3

4

5 I, PATRICIA J. RUSSONIELLO, a

6 Certified Court Reporter and a Notary Public of the

7 State of New Jersey, do hereby certify that prior to

8 the commencement of the examination the witness was

9 duly sworn by me.

10 I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that the

11 following is a true and accurate transcript of the

12 testimony as taken stenographically by and before me

13 at the date, time and place aforementioned.

14 I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am

15 neither a relative nor employee, nor attorney or

16 counsel to any parties involved; that I am neither

17 related to nor employed by any such attorney or

18 counsel, and that I am not financially interested in

19 the action.

20

21

22

23

\\PATRICIA J. RUSSONIELLO

24 NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

My Commission Expires: 4/20/2020

25 C.C.R. License No. XI00517

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 193 of 218 PageID:

44112
Page 1

A

Abbott 18:5

able 13:21 19:10

48:14 51:6 78:16

79:10 116:16

124:10 136:11

145:21 146:17

173:4

above-entitled 1:14

above-referenced

60:3

absolutely 13:14

77:3 79:2 149:1

149:15,22 150:13

150:21,24 151:12

151:22 153:1,8

access 32:9 74:17

160:13

accessed 106:14

accommodate

108:9

Account 25:9

accounting 25:10

52:25 65:3 68:2,7

accumulation

105:15

accurate 120:10

192:11

acquired 138:10

acquisition 19:5

27:14 39:6

action 1:2,14 54:12

72:5 192:19

actions 54:15,19

73:5,22

active 19:1,3,6

30:15,19

Activities 5:6

167:11

actual 119:4

add 47:25 74:4

101:15

added 151:10

address 115:6

addressed 171:17

adjacent 167:20

adjust 169:24

adjustment 169:13

administrative

126:12

admitted 17:22

advice 28:15 78:1

80:16

advise 122:14

Affidavit 158:9,13

Affidavits 130:17

affirmation 117:17

affirms 117:22

aforementioned

192:13

AFTERNOON

113:23

agency 126:13

aggregates 162:1

ago 10:18,18 11:24

13:11 14:16,21,23

108:14 135:20

140:10

agree 87:11 119:11

119:20 126:21

agreed 29:25

174:12

agreement 61:12

90:7 176:20,24

177:9,13 178:1,18

179:13,24 181:5

183:10 185:1

agreements 57:9

agrees 176:15

ahead 50:15 63:1

AIG 9:6

al 1:3,6 7:4,5 108:5

108:11,13 190:4

allegation 100:19

100:20 109:22

allegations 85:20

86:1 91:10 98:1

98:16,19,21 99:1

99:4,7 100:7

113:3

allege 64:8

alleged 109:25

110:1

alleges 110:21,22

alleging 10:23

70:25 71:11

100:11 111:16

112:13

allow 103:9 142:4

152:18

allowed 114:9

Amended 16:17,21

amount 24:6 56:13

57:2,5 60:5,11

185:9

amounts 68:3

analysis 96:12

118:2,5,16 138:12

138:20 139:21

142:7 144:5

161:19,21

and/or 73:6,7 84:10

85:5,10

Anguas 2:9 8:2,2

answer 6:7 13:2,4,6

13:8,15,19,21

29:22 32:4 46:24

48:7,15,21 50:15

50:19 51:5,6,10

51:24 52:23,24

55:8 57:8,12,14

61:17 62:12 71:4

76:20,21,22 77:19

77:22,23 78:4,9

78:11,16,24 79:10

79:24 80:1,10,14

80:20 81:8,10,15

82:1 83:19 85:25

88:5 90:18 92:21

92:25 95:19,23

96:5,8,15 98:18

99:9 102:17 103:3

103:4 109:17

117:11,12 119:18

120:13 122:10,16

122:24 123:8

124:6,9,13 126:4

127:1 128:12

130:1,21 132:9

133:10 134:18,20

135:24 137:17

141:15 142:4

145:14,21,22,24

146:13,17 147:8

152:6,10,15,19,21

152:22 153:6,14

153:16 154:6

156:17 157:20

158:3 160:2

161:14 165:9

172:15 173:10

177:22 180:3,17

180:18,21,22

181:15 183:5,16

183:17 184:1,3,6

184:8,11,12,18

185:12

answered 111:5

133:13 140:3

answering 42:21

43:6,14,18 115:8

116:3 119:9 127:4

127:23 133:7

135:5 154:5,17

156:14,18

answers 5:13,19

40:9,12 43:24

44:2,9 116:23

117:1 120:7 121:6

121:21 124:1

125:17 131:13

134:5 140:23

143:10 155:24

156:5 159:13

161:2,10 184:16

Anthony 2:13 8:4

anybody 16:24

38:15 98:25

108:15 164:12

179:18 190:2,8,15

anybody's 144:18

anyway 52:23

61:18 76:25

143:24

apiece 185:20

apol 97:10

apologize 183:1

apparently 143:13

appear 54:18

appearance 131:3

132:7

appearances 7:16

93:18,19 131:11

appeared 15:23

16:5

appears 169:15

applicable 103:8

approach 19:8

appropriate 141:19

approval 53:14,15

approve 174:18

approved 53:12,18

57:2

approximately

18:3,8 51:20

174:4

April 1:11 7:7

12:12 15:12 95:2

114:16

Arch 2:14

area 26:16 96:3

100:21 101:5

areas 20:7 35:5,13

73:1

argue 143:16

argumentative

142:15,20

Arleo 1:17 2:18

7:23

arrange 74:15

arranged 11:7

arrangement 30:23

artfully 113:1

Arthur 3:5 5:16 8:7

22:1 26:5 27:2

37:4 38:15 53:3

53:18 57:18 63:8

63:9 69:20 72:4

73:13 84:8 85:3,4

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 194 of 218 PageID:

44113
Page 2

87:5,25 98:14,25

121:25 122:6,19

165:20,23,25,25

166:5 174:20

asbestiform 161:25

167:24

asbestos 10:24 53:5

70:24,25 71:10,11

73:7 76:3,18

77:17 78:5,19

79:13,22 80:19,22

81:5,22 82:8,18

82:23 83:4 85:5

85:10,18,23 90:14

90:22 91:4,8,13

92:20,23 93:7

96:19 100:13,17

109:23 110:11,22

110:25 111:16,16

111:18 112:12,13

113:3,6 126:13,15

138:15,22 139:8

139:24 140:1

142:9 144:7

148:11 149:2

150:25 151:2

153:9 157:6,12

162:14,21 163:11

163:19 164:1,11

164:18 165:6,18

166:5,12 169:23

170:8 171:4,21

173:5 178:11

179:19 180:13

181:20 182:8

183:8

asbestos-free 76:12

169:12 172:25

asbestos-related

73:5,10,22 101:8

126:14

Ashton 158:8,13

aside 83:10

asked 36:9 70:17

73:25 78:8 81:15

111:5 112:5

115:23 120:19

122:12 129:20

133:13 141:14

145:25 146:4,11

151:7 152:7,14

159:21 165:24

183:23

asking 49:16 80:8

81:2,3 98:24

99:10 102:11,13

110:17 111:23

112:4 122:8 123:4

125:22 127:1

128:9,14,16

133:21 141:3,4,6

141:7,9 142:15

143:1,11 144:18

144:19 145:7,11

145:12,16 146:2

146:10 149:12,18

149:20 150:3,14

151:4,15,24

152:12 165:12

173:7,7 177:3,4

178:17,20 179:23

180:6,9,15,23

181:1,10,24

183:12 186:6

assay 90:1

assembled 87:4

assert 80:22 81:5

82:22 83:3

asserted 76:2 81:21

82:17

assertion 76:17

77:16 78:4,18

79:12,22 80:18

163:5

assess 139:17

assessed 113:16

assessing 184:2

assigned 20:17

23:19,20 24:12,22

33:17 38:7

assignment 20:9

117:7

assist 25:23 156:14

assistance 129:6

assistant 21:15,19

25:18,20 27:21

28:2,3 39:23

assistants 39:16,22

assisted 156:18

associate 12:16

14:10 21:16,20

25:16 27:22 28:1

115:10

associates 14:9

60:22

assume 125:23

130:12,12 141:4

assuming 75:20

121:15 130:13

133:15 141:3

189:13

assumption 75:23

attached 4:10,12,20

4:22 84:7

attaching 69:24

attachment 63:17

attachments 4:24

168:22

attempt 170:5

attend 45:10

attendance 155:14

attended 53:4

155:15

attention 10:5

69:11 88:22 92:14

95:9 117:15

161:13 176:6,7

attorney 42:6

123:16 124:11

192:15,17

attorneys 2:7,12,16

2:20 3:5,9 11:6,8

12:19 13:11 16:13

38:9,17 51:15

55:18 75:20 78:19

79:13 80:22 81:4

81:20 83:3

attorney-client

12:24 13:3 98:3

173:8

August 58:4 156:1

168:18 169:3

authority 41:7 46:1

authorization

40:13,17 41:7,8

41:11,12,16,19,21

42:5,18 44:3,6

46:2,7 55:24

81:23 82:9,12,15

83:5 158:23

authorizations

42:11

authorize 42:16

80:22 81:3,4

authorized 57:6

82:4,6 83:16

158:18

authorizing 83:2

available 19:17

118:12,12

Avenue 1:17 2:5,19

7:10 27:1

average 60:9

185:20

avoid 105:15

aware 10:25 11:4

63:9,22 76:1 78:7

82:16 85:17,22

90:23 91:3,6,9,10

91:11 92:7 96:25

106:19,22 107:17

118:16 123:23

125:15,24 135:3

162:13,20 163:17

166:9 174:11,14

174:15 175:2,5

188:1

awhile 28:9 65:13

129:18 154:16

a.m 1:18 7:8 49:25

50:2,7 57:21,24

B

B 4:7 5:1

back 18:22 20:4

22:13,19,20 23:10

23:17 25:2,13

37:20 38:7 42:10

48:8,9 53:20

63:16 66:2 77:12

77:13 79:7 87:21

90:25 97:19,20

98:1 101:2 109:4

114:2 120:17

125:9,11 128:3,4

128:5 130:3

134:16,17 144:1,2

145:4,5 151:20

163:1 164:25

172:20 177:23,24

background 154:9

Bagel 88:15,20

bags 148:23

Bank 2:5

base 9:10 19:12

based 21:5,9 51:24

70:22 71:8 82:5

118:1 119:21

129:4 149:6

152:17

BASF 1:6 2:12 4:22

5:4,8,11,14 7:4

8:1,3 11:1,6,8

19:5,19,22 27:14

39:5,8 69:10 72:5

73:4,8,9 101:7

BASF's 80:5

BASF-Lopez 5:7

BASF-Sampson

4:17

BASF-Williams

4:21 5:15

BASF_Sampson

4:13

BASF_Williams

5:20

basically 18:11

123:5 139:12

basis 19:24 51:4

76:17 77:16 78:1

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 195 of 218 PageID:

44114
Page 3

78:4,18 79:12,21

80:2,18 133:8

134:2,4 146:12

157:11 159:14

Bates 59:17 63:20

66:21 89:1 92:15

95:10 161:5 167:3

Bedminster 18:20

began 21:25

beginning 20:4

63:16 120:14

167:3 176:8

begins 7:2 89:1

161:18

behalf 8:8 40:10

41:23 42:22 43:19

93:23 102:19

118:2 127:5,24

believe 13:18 19:2

21:15 23:12 26:11

31:3 40:4 44:13

50:11 55:23 77:10

94:8 97:2 100:6

104:2,6 119:14

120:25 121:4,12

121:19 122:5,21

125:8 134:9 140:2

145:3,20 148:8

153:6 154:7

155:13 156:1

174:3 186:9 188:8

190:4

believes 101:6

Ben 21:23

benefit 17:3 19:11

19:11

Bergstein 16:5

Bergstein's 32:23

33:15 34:2,3,12

34:21 65:25 66:24

best 111:13 141:15

better 62:21 88:19

Bevan 60:22 61:13

Bevin 185:16

beyond 29:23 129:8

154:10 170:24,24

175:2

big 11:21 52:15

74:9

billing 36:13 54:5

binder 75:18

bit 29:10 39:25

66:1 112:6 154:20

blackwall 167:19

Board 25:21

175:12

body 169:9

Bondo 138:2,6

148:10,25 149:3

book 75:3 88:21

books 175:9

bottom 93:21

106:10

Boulevard 3:3,7

Boyle 3:2 8:7

brand 37:25

break 49:23 50:11

66:16,24 77:1,10

97:11 100:23

101:1 104:24

113:19 125:7

144:11,12,16

145:3 154:14

186:13

breakdowns 52:17

break-out 68:10,11

Breed 18:5

Bress 2:8 7:25,25

12:14 13:1,3 26:7

29:21 36:1 37:2

38:19 40:14 41:9

41:17 42:8,23

43:9,21 44:4,21

45:2,16,22 46:3

46:24 47:8,15,18

48:6,11 49:16,20

50:14,18 51:2,9

51:17,22 52:22

53:10 55:5 56:2,6

56:8,15,24 58:12

58:14,20 59:4

60:14 61:3,14,16

62:23 64:2,13,24

65:20 66:18 67:1

67:7,14 68:4,6,15

70:5 71:2,5,13,20

73:16 75:5 76:4,8

76:19 77:18 78:6

78:20,22 79:15,23

80:8,24 81:2,6,12

81:25 82:10,20

83:6 85:7,19,24

86:11,14 88:4

90:17,19 93:9

97:7,10 99:8,13

99:15,19 100:18

101:14 102:10,15

103:2,18 104:1

107:8,12 108:23

109:13 110:5,7

111:1,3,5,19,21

112:5,14 113:7,9

116:4,13 117:8,10

118:7,20,23

119:17,25 120:12

120:24 121:9,24

123:1,3,9,14,18

124:3,5,7,16

125:20 126:25

127:6 128:2,7,24

129:15 131:2,16

132:3,21 133:12

134:6,19 135:8,17

136:3 138:24

140:3,6,17,19,25

141:7,22,24 142:5

142:12 144:9,14

145:7,11,19,25

146:4,8,22 147:9

149:11,17,25

150:7,9,11,14,17

151:3,14,19,24

152:7,11,17

153:12 154:3

157:16,18 158:20

159:17 160:15

162:16,24 163:13

163:21 164:13,22

165:1,12,22

166:16 169:25

170:10 171:6

172:15 173:6,16

173:19 174:24

176:25 177:2,17

177:19 178:15,20

179:22 180:5,14

180:19 181:1,5,8

181:16,22,24

183:11,19,23

184:2,7,15 185:4

186:5 187:7

188:12,18,20,23

190:15,18

brief 94:14 171:10

briefing 75:3

briefly 94:12

broke 100:5

brokers 51:13

brought 54:16,16

budgets 51:15

building 26:10,20

26:21,24,25 27:2

27:5

Bulk 148:22,23

bunch 54:15

business 20:17,20

21:9 23:19 24:1,5

24:9,20,24 25:12

30:13 32:20

105:17,18 108:8

108:21 109:3,6,20

134:14,24 135:1

135:21 136:13,15

137:2

businesses 20:10

buy-out 22:25

C

C 2:1,22 3:1 8:12

Cahill 2:16 4:14 8:4

28:15,18,23 29:7

29:19 31:11,15,17

35:23 36:7,9,10

36:14,18,20 43:1

44:14,15,23 54:1

55:4 57:15 61:22

74:16,18 75:8,10

75:21 76:10 78:7

82:5,6,6,14 83:16

83:22 84:4 85:13

87:1,4 90:13

93:22 98:25

115:23 116:8

118:12 129:9

130:5,14,15,16

131:22,22,24

132:1,9,14,24

133:1,7,8,16

135:2,6 136:22

137:1,8 154:9

160:12 163:17

164:2,6,7,12

168:9 185:16

Cahill's 30:6

California 162:5

call 19:8,19 24:12

32:12 60:19,23

94:11 149:14

169:17

called 23:21 87:22

102:18 136:2

calling 80:25

calls 78:1 81:7

113:9

Campo 21:23

candor 119:13

canvassing 135:23

136:14

career 17:18 18:1

careful 46:25 55:5

carefully 40:8

87:19 139:9 163:8

carrier 49:9,11,12

50:25 67:16,19

carriers 49:3,15,17

50:13 67:13

case 9:5 10:20 11:1

11:5,10,13,18

12:1 15:21 16:15

33:25 34:16,25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 196 of 218 PageID:

44115
Page 4

35:9,10,11,17,20

35:21 41:18 48:2

49:8,15 50:13

51:21,24 52:4,6,9

53:9 55:24 64:23

68:2,11,11 69:10

91:25 95:3 96:23

97:1,3,5,6,23,24

98:1,6,6,8,10,20

98:20 100:8,9,12

102:8,9,25 109:22

110:3,9 114:15

115:19 116:1,21

116:22 117:1

126:23 127:23

131:17,18,25

137:5,10 143:9

154:21,25 155:4,6

155:9,9,13,25

156:4 159:21

160:18 161:4

162:12 163:7,18

163:25 164:10,18

165:5,17,19 166:4

166:11,11,20

167:12 168:25

169:23 170:4,6,8

170:19,25 172:10

172:14,18 174:7,8

174:8,13 175:22

176:3 184:23

185:2,8,9,10,25

cases 28:7,12 29:5

30:16,17,20,22

32:13,18 33:12,14

34:1,2,4,9,13 35:5

35:15 36:4 37:6

39:18 40:20 42:1

48:4 52:3,12,17

53:5,13,21,22

54:6,8,8,9,10,13

54:16 56:10 59:3

59:10 60:9 64:25

65:4,16 67:5,8,9

67:10,12,25 71:22

71:23 74:1,3,6

82:2,3 83:7,11,13

83:20,22 84:1

101:17 110:2,11

111:15,16 119:21

136:7 174:15

185:17,19

case-by-case 33:19

catalysts 1:6 2:12

5:4 7:4 21:6 72:5

categories 73:19

category 74:20

cathodic 21:5

causation 71:15

causes 109:23

caution 157:18

166:13

cc'd 58:25

central 106:14

certain 101:24

108:21 128:10,10

148:15 151:2

certainly 52:18

66:9 108:24

127:15 129:5

175:1

Certificate 4:10

192:1

certified 1:15 143:5

143:10 169:5

192:6

certify 143:17

192:7,10,14

certifying 120:6

chance 23:8

change 18:16 22:18

23:8 50:25 108:8

changed 21:16

22:25 23:22

changes 108:9

characterize 68:20

charge 107:2

Chatham 3:3

checks 175:8

Chernick 15:21

35:11 52:4,6

66:11 114:15

131:18

chlorite 95:22

choice 184:7

Chris 7:21

CHRISTOPHER

2:3 7:21

chronology 170:12

chrysotile 92:19,23

96:14,18 161:25

167:24

circumstances 9:3

22:16 31:22 97:4

97:22 172:13

City 18:4,9

CIVIL 1:2

claim 9:6,8 10:23

67:16 70:25 71:11

103:12 109:17,18

110:21 112:17,19

112:22 148:13

claiming 63:23

claims 64:11,15

67:19,25 109:16

109:16 110:14,14

111:12 112:13

113:15 189:5

clarification 146:5

183:24

clarify 13:12 76:5

146:11

Clark 167:13

class 54:12,15

clause 172:23

176:23 177:8,11

179:11 180:8,11

180:24 184:22

clean 101:1

clear 166:2 178:7

clearance 41:12

clearly 23:15 66:9

client 20:23 24:21

143:5 177:14

178:3,8

clients 20:9,11,12

20:24 24:2

client's 41:8 148:13

clip 86:10

close 47:20 48:23

closed 84:19 136:16

136:16 138:11

closely 121:11

code 189:16

Cohen 2:2 7:11

collaboration 18:6

collected 74:18

106:23 135:2

136:18 161:24

167:17

collecting 107:2

collection 4:14

30:10 87:1,4,16

College 161:23

Columbia 17:6,9

18:2

column 73:2

combined 58:22

come 27:11 29:11

29:16 44:9,24

55:24 81:17 87:21

88:14 90:25

132:24 143:21

157:25

comes 148:1

coming 37:20 83:16

commencement

192:8

commencing 1:18

Commerce 2:3

Commission

192:24

committee 126:12

communicate

36:17 82:4 98:5,9

98:12 154:8

communicating

173:13

communication

48:12,22 80:25

81:8,13 116:18

157:20 177:12

communications

29:18,19 49:17

50:21 51:3 78:2

80:1,3,7,17 83:11

98:5 132:16 154:4

165:4,23 166:14

172:16 173:9

company 5:20

23:23 28:14 47:24

52:13,15 65:1

67:20 83:25

101:21 102:20

118:13 127:5,24

136:12,14 155:15

155:16 157:3

161:3 174:11

175:1 179:25

180:24 181:2

190:3,9,9

company's 5:13

30:12 155:24

compilation 87:8

87:13

complaining

142:23

complaint 16:18,21

28:13 31:10 36:6

74:7,12 155:6

159:22

complaints 28:6,11

30:15,22 40:5,9

complete 120:10

121:6,21 122:24

124:1 125:17

completed 39:6

completely 141:13

concentration

182:6

concerning 85:23

126:13

concluded 102:8

103:1 138:13,21

139:23 142:8

144:6 190:19

concludes 190:24

conclusion 102:19

103:15 113:9

167:23

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 197 of 218 PageID:

44116
Page 5

conclusions 123:5

123:16 140:13

conclusively 148:9

condition 177:15

178:3,9

conduct 118:6

128:17

conducted 16:14

118:2 138:13,20

139:22 142:8

144:6

conference 148:7

confident 169:11

172:24

confirmation 90:7

Congressional

126:12

conjunction 117:23

143:19

connection 71:16

consideration

179:12,16

considering 133:19

consistent 169:10

consolidated 21:25

85:1

consolidation 22:3

consult 19:17,19

119:8 129:5

consulted 126:1

contain 138:14,22

139:24 142:9

144:7 157:6,12

contained 44:9

80:6 100:17 106:4

148:11 149:1

150:25 153:9

173:5 176:18

containing 69:25

contains 70:24

71:10

content 48:12 81:3

85:23 100:13

contents 118:1

context 29:7 34:12

49:1,14 50:13

51:11 97:5,23

98:6,7 100:9

113:1 150:17

155:3 162:12

163:7 184:23

185:17

continuation 19:1,9

continued 2:22 3:1

5:1 92:3

continuing 129:17

176:14

contract 178:22

179:1,5 180:24

181:12,21 182:1

contracts 20:14

contradicted 121:3

contradicting

121:18

contribution 60:16

62:9

control 122:11

129:10 130:6

Controllers 25:10

convenience 61:8

conversation 48:19

conversations

163:14

Cool 88:25

coordinate 28:16

115:17 117:3,3,7

131:13

coordinated 115:11

118:17 127:3,7

134:5 139:15

140:23

coordinates 116:6

116:19

coordinating 20:19

120:7 121:7,22

122:24 124:1

125:18 127:18

129:14 130:10

coordination

115:25

copies 6:3 86:5,9

106:12

copy 15:20,25

58:11,12 59:7

61:10 66:17 91:18

147:12 187:5

copying 58:5

corner 141:16

corporate 18:4,11

18:21,23,24 24:23

25:7,11 26:19

115:7 121:7,22

122:24 124:1

125:17 127:4

133:6 143:2

170:19

corporation 5:10

18:15 25:22 93:23

105:15 114:13

115:11 148:10

correct 34:5,23

44:19 55:16,25

67:13 71:23 78:21

79:14 82:19 87:13

89:22 92:20 95:18

95:19,22,23 96:4

96:5,14,15 109:6

116:14 122:13

123:18 133:3

178:23 181:12

184:17 186:9

188:10,11

correctly 93:3

149:4 162:6

correspondence

65:5 67:9 170:17

185:15,23

cost 51:21 52:5,8

52:12

costs 169:15

Cottrell 23:1

counsel 7:15 14:3

15:23 16:3,23

20:18,20 21:15,16

21:20,23 25:17

27:22 28:1,15,16

28:17 30:2,10,14

30:24 31:1,4,7,10

31:13,17,20,23

32:9,11,13,15

33:3 34:8 35:23

35:24 36:8,8,17

36:20 40:23 41:4

41:14,15 42:13

43:1 50:1,24 51:3

54:18,21 55:3

61:11,13,20,23,24

62:2,9 69:25

74:16 75:1,3,11

78:17 79:12 82:3

82:4,7,13 83:11

93:19 97:14,25

98:17,19 99:2,24

100:8 115:10,23

116:8 125:3 127:8

129:5 131:22

150:6 155:8,10

156:17,19 158:7

158:14 160:13

163:18 164:10

165:5,10,13,16

166:10,15 168:12

169:22 171:3,12

171:24,25 185:7

192:16,18

counsels 82:22

counsel's 154:24

County 16:8

couple 15:22 19:23

22:11 54:5 65:5

course 101:25

128:17 154:5

172:17

court 1:1,15 7:5,13

8:10 17:23 91:24

119:12 192:6

courteous 142:22

Courts 17:21 40:25

41:4,8 81:21

cover 41:19 65:21

66:3 83:14 175:20

175:23

coverage 50:16,17

covered 33:8,9

46:22 180:8

covering 156:23

Craig 160:6,9

created 11:22

12:10 69:10

creates 182:5

credit 175:9

crossing 140:20

current 43:13,16

60:4 137:4,8

currently 159:4

custody 129:10

130:6

cut 129:23 175:7

Cuzzone 4:24

168:19,24 173:14

175:20 177:13

178:2,10 179:7,17

181:18 182:11

183:7

Cuzzone's 178:8

C.C.R 192:25

D

D 4:1 25:10 105:4

109:5,11 110:4,25

111:17 112:11,11

113:5 126:15

Dan 7:25 11:14,21

14:7 66:17 77:25

147:8

DANIEL 2:8

Daniels 167:13

daniel.bress@kir...

2:11

data 85:22

date 26:15 104:11

170:23 171:1

192:13

dated 89:5 105:5

114:16 147:22

156:1 161:4 169:2

187:24

dates 114:19

David 167:12

day 15:17 183:3

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 198 of 218 PageID:

44117
Page 6

days 9:25 10:18,18

134:13

deals 20:14

deal-type 18:11

debit 175:8

deceased 159:3

decided 117:2

deciding 53:8 64:11

decipher 48:17

decision 56:12 57:1

57:5 158:12,16,22

184:5

decisions 119:21

Decof 5:6 167:12

deep 47:11

defend 20:18 51:21

52:6,9,12

defendant 3:5,9

5:12,16 72:4

155:24

defendants 1:7

2:16 54:20 57:10

60:17 61:9,15,25

62:6,16 63:6

defendant's 156:17

156:19

defending 29:8

30:7 31:8 35:24

39:3 61:24 76:1

82:16 155:3

defense 31:4,7,17

31:20,23 32:15

34:8 35:24 53:5

61:10,13,19 62:2

74:15,16 83:22

84:3 88:8 94:6

156:4 164:17

168:12 169:14

defenses 73:5,21

Definitely 15:18

defraction 96:3

degree 17:7,8

demand 169:16

Dembrow 2:17 8:5

29:9

demonstrates

148:9

deny 148:24

department 18:4

18:14,15,24,24

20:6 21:4 23:21

25:7 32:10 36:24

39:3,12,14 52:20

53:8,12,17 56:4

57:3,6 65:11

67:21 83:21 92:18

92:22 93:6 94:14

107:6,25 108:4,16

109:11 111:15

112:3,11 113:5

174:23 179:1

184:21

departmental

25:12

departments 20:12

21:25 24:23 25:8

84:25 108:8

depended 31:9

depending 60:12

depends 110:14

Deponent 2:20

deposing 150:1

deposition 1:4,13

4:10 7:3,9 8:21,23

9:4,13,23 10:2

14:4 16:25 50:2

85:12 91:24 92:4

93:14 95:1 96:22

97:15 99:25

122:20 123:22

125:4 126:11

127:22,22 129:13

130:9,18,25 131:8

131:11 132:2,8

133:9,10,17

138:19 162:11

187:21 190:25

depositions 45:8,10

123:22 125:14,23

125:25 126:22

128:21 149:8

185:2

describe 74:1

111:13

described 37:18

describes 155:17

describing 59:2

DESCRIPTION

4:8 5:2

destroy 101:24

112:16

destroyed 102:9,25

112:23

destruction 103:11

103:13,23

detail 134:9

detailed 47:9,19

details 29:5 33:14

36:19 48:1 64:17

109:20 175:7

determined 20:9

62:4 63:4

development 92:8

developments

108:10

different 21:3

33:21,22 43:4

53:15 55:21 57:16

80:12 81:9 102:20

112:7 136:19

141:1,8,18 182:5

187:22

diffraction 95:17

direct 32:9 69:11

88:12,22 89:19

92:14 95:9 160:13

176:6,7

directed 154:8

direction 104:17

DIRECTIONS 6:7

directly 30:24

36:17 49:9 50:25

60:20,23 75:6

116:16 159:3

171:11

Directors 175:13

dis 171:14

discard 106:6,8

discarded 103:17

107:11,14

discarding 105:17

disclosable 80:7

disclose 46:25

49:17 51:3 80:11

81:7 120:5,20,22

121:5,20 122:22

123:24 125:16

129:13 130:9

133:9 176:16

disclosed 119:22

171:2,7,15

disclosing 29:17

48:3,15 81:12

124:9 153:14

disclosure 84:8

disclosures 5:17

72:4 100:22

discontinued 105:6

105:24 106:13,20

discoverable 72:15

72:17 85:10

discovery 41:22,24

42:7,14,18,20,21

43:6,14,18,24

44:2,9,24 119:13

119:22 137:5,10

176:18

discuss 165:4,16

166:3 169:17

discussed 12:22

13:10,16,25 14:2

29:23 50:23 74:4

74:23 101:16

112:12 123:23

125:14 147:24

149:9 163:11,15

164:2,9 165:19

168:5 171:22

185:3 186:1

discusses 100:22

discussing 67:4

144:13

discussion 36:19

57:23 153:22

164:6,12,15 168:6

discussions 164:16

168:8,11 171:23

171:24 176:20

disease 70:25 71:12

109:23

diseases 63:24,25

126:14

disposition 64:23

distinguished 64:10

distributor's 49:11

District 1:1,1 7:5,6

91:24,25

division 20:10

21:24 35:22

130:13 132:15

divisional 21:25

divulge 76:20

123:20

divulging 76:23

80:16

doc 103:15

docket 187:17

document 4:15 5:3

58:19 63:15 64:21

69:14 72:6 86:17

87:7,17 90:20,23

93:17 104:24

105:5,9,12 106:19

107:17,24 108:17

140:21 167:4,7

187:18,23 188:2

188:12 190:5,10

documentation

158:8

documented 67:17

documents 4:15 6:1

6:3 10:6,8,13

12:20 15:12,15,19

16:12 60:9 66:17

73:9 87:2,2,4,13

88:23 101:7

103:12,16 105:16

106:12,23 107:2

107:10,15 108:21

108:25 109:2,10

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 199 of 218 PageID:

44118
Page 7

110:4,25 111:17

112:12,16,20

113:5,16 128:10

129:2 136:22

148:15 158:9,13

176:19 188:11

doing 42:3,17 54:6

78:9 135:23

154:13 172:17

dollars 59:11 60:10

185:20

Donohue 1:17 2:18

2:18 7:23,23,24

10:21 12:23 13:8

13:12,15,18,20,23

13:25 14:20 29:25

40:15 44:5 46:4

48:20 50:3 52:24

56:16,19,22 58:13

68:23 69:5 71:3

71:21 76:5 78:23

81:14,18,24 82:1

86:19 87:12 88:3

88:5,17 90:16,18

91:1,20 94:22

98:12 99:6 100:24

103:4 109:12

110:6 111:2,20

118:24 119:16,18

119:24 120:8,11

120:13 121:8,23

123:2,13,19 124:4

124:6,14,22,25

125:21 127:11,14

127:18 128:4,25

129:16 131:7,15

132:4,12 133:11

133:13 135:12

140:18 141:23

142:14 143:8,17

143:20 146:25

149:10 150:20

151:10 152:25

153:4,10 157:13

157:15,17,24

158:2,4,21 159:15

160:23 162:23

163:22 164:20

165:8 166:7,13,25

168:23 172:6

173:20 177:1,21

177:23 178:5,13

179:10,20 181:14

181:23 182:15,17

182:19,23 186:3

186:11 187:11

188:17,19 189:3

190:22

Dornbusch 3:5

5:16 8:7 22:1 26:5

26:9 38:15 53:18

63:8 69:21 72:13

72:14 73:13,20

85:3,4 87:5,25

98:25 100:22

101:5 121:2,10

122:19 123:21,21

125:13,23 165:20

165:25 166:5

174:20 190:17

Dornbusch's 72:4

84:8

Dr 92:7 93:6

126:22 161:22

162:20 166:19

177:16 178:4,11

179:18 180:12

181:19 182:7

183:8

draft 40:22,25

drafted 107:6

drafting 20:14

45:14,17,23 108:1

108:3

drawing 140:13

draws 182:1

drove 167:16

due 10:23

duly 8:13 192:9

dump 167:19

duplicates 59:14

duration 26:3

duties 18:11 22:25

27:13 38:1,2

duty 19:1,3,6 24:13

119:13

D.C 2:10

E

E 2:1,1,22,22 3:1,1

3:10,10 4:1,7 5:1

8:12,12,12

Eagle 1:17 2:19

7:10

earlier 14:8 15:9

38:21 54:4 70:12

74:14,25 90:2

94:9 101:16

122:20 123:23

125:14 139:5

140:9 154:20

162:11 188:1

early 22:5 27:8

37:5 106:19

148:21 155:13

easier 89:9

East 21:9

Eastern 5:12,20

155:24 157:3

161:3

easy 154:18

eat 88:16 151:16

economic 138:11

edition 187:22

education 17:3

effect 91:10 153:2

180:23

effective 54:1

either 22:12 30:24

36:20 58:24 60:11

122:5,18 152:15

174:7 190:8

electron 96:2,2,3

162:4

Elizabeth 168:19

168:24 175:20

177:13 178:2,8,10

Ellis 2:8 8:1,3

12:17,20 14:10

else's 142:16

Em 38:16 45:11

employ 159:5

employed 15:23

190:9 192:17

employee 19:9

137:4,9 192:15

employees 43:7,12

43:13,16,17

126:10

employment 19:10

19:21,23

Emtal 27:12,18,20

27:25 29:1,8,10

30:7,11 31:8

35:24 36:25 38:9

38:17 39:3,13

40:3,23 41:1 49:1

51:11,21 52:12

63:25 64:23 70:22

71:8 76:2,3,18

77:17 78:5,19

79:14,22 80:19,23

81:5,22 82:8,17

82:18 83:5 85:18

85:23 89:24,25

90:15 91:4,7,13

92:19,24 93:8

94:6 100:14,17

102:6 105:24

107:11,15 109:6,9

109:22,23 110:4

110:21,22,25

111:7,9,16,18

112:11,13 113:4,5

138:7,8,9,10

148:22,22,22,23

148:23,23,25

150:25 166:12

173:5 174:8

184:23 185:10

Emtal's 109:20

Emtal-related

106:23

enclosing 175:21

encompassed 54:9

ended 15:9,9 19:1

39:4 174:3

enforce 181:12

enforcing 181:18

engage 36:8 141:17

engaged 42:12

157:4

engagement 31:24

32:12 42:15

Engelard 5:9

Engelhard 4:12 9:6

9:10 10:24 15:23

15:24 18:13,15,23

18:25 19:7 20:5

21:24 22:6,14,19

22:20,22 23:4,10

23:17 24:10,16

26:3,12 27:4 30:7

32:10 33:23 35:5

35:18,23 36:24

37:7,21 38:1,8,16

39:2,6,12 40:2,5

40:10 41:6,16,23

42:5,5,6,22 43:19

46:2 51:15,21

52:5,9,11,20

53:17 55:25 56:14

59:7 61:24 62:5

62:15 63:4,4 64:9

64:22 71:17 73:4

73:9 75:2 78:18

79:13 80:21,21

81:4 82:17,23

83:3 84:3,19,24

90:13 91:11 92:9

92:12 93:23 94:12

94:15 95:7,18

100:14 104:6,15

104:22 105:11,15

106:18 111:15

113:12 114:13

115:10 117:23

118:2,6 135:15,23

136:1 137:7 138:2

138:5,8 139:25

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 200 of 218 PageID:

44119
Page 8

140:24 143:19

148:10,10,24

153:7 154:24

158:19 159:13,25

160:13 163:12

164:9,16 165:11

165:13,15 168:5

169:10,13,21

172:23 173:3

174:3,6,12,19

175:4,12 176:23

177:8 178:9,22,25

181:11 182:2,8

184:20 185:10

187:16 188:2

Engelhard's 15:25

40:13 41:14 44:3

44:19,22 45:25

49:2,10 53:7 56:4

60:16 62:8 73:8

76:2,11,11 81:20

81:22 82:9 83:5

83:21 91:3,6

100:17 101:7

102:7,23 103:14

108:17,20 109:9

109:10 110:3,24

111:11 115:11,18

129:12 130:8

138:6 148:12

156:5 160:12

Engelhard's/BAS...

85:6

Engelhard/BASF

73:21 101:8

entered 178:23

184:25

entire 26:5 83:24

Entries 5:3

entry 69:13,15

equals 186:6

equivocation

140:16 142:10,17

143:6 144:8

era 170:25

Eric 3:6 8:8

especially 76:24

Esq 2:2,3,8,9,13,18

3:2,6 4:10

Esquire 72:24

115:10

essentially 19:10

23:23 37:17 38:2

39:9 102:19

111:23 181:3

established 102:16

estate 18:11

et 1:3,6 7:4,5

etunis@herold.c...

3:8

everybody 36:23

72:11 101:25

139:11 183:3

Everybody's 50:3

evidence 70:24

71:10 82:18 83:1

83:4 85:17,21

88:1 90:13 100:13

100:16 139:14

142:18 149:1,16

149:22 150:13,22

150:25 151:8,12

151:13,22,23

153:1,1,8 169:10

170:15 171:13

evidential 142:17

exact 155:11

exactly 11:3,9,17

20:11 25:19 32:7

53:16 131:24

138:3 163:4

187:23

examination 1:5

4:2 8:14 192:8

examined 162:3

exception 36:3 49:5

49:6 51:19 56:11

189:10

Excerpted 5:3

excerpts 69:9 91:19

94:24 129:3,4

138:18 149:7

exchange 154:12

179:13

exchanged 30:25

excluding 4:15 87:2

excuse 10:5 130:17

executed 179:1

180:25

executive 26:19

27:5

executives 160:14

exhibit 4:14,16,18

5:3,5,8,9,12,15,16

5:18,22 9:17,17

10:1 58:3,22 69:9

72:3 84:7 86:25

91:17,22 94:18

95:1 101:2 105:3

107:18 109:4

114:5,12 119:23

130:24 131:7

147:15,25 148:6

155:23 161:1

167:2 168:17

169:6 172:20

175:16,19 185:14

186:1,19,23

187:13 191:4

exhibits 5:22 16:20

126:21 127:21

129:10 130:6

185:3 191:3

existed 52:19 66:9

66:12 113:11

188:4

exists 85:18,22

expect 88:1,2,10

112:6 120:4,22

133:8 173:3

expected 19:15

111:14 127:23

129:11 130:8

expenses 51:16

52:14,14 53:1

68:11

experience 70:22

71:8 184:20

experienced 129:5

expert 100:11

139:7 140:11

162:13 163:6,10

163:19,24,25

164:10,17 165:6

165:17,21 166:4

166:11,20 170:7

171:4,13,21

Expires 192:24

explain 36:8 116:15

150:4 151:6 173:9

181:9 183:12,22

explained 183:19

exposure 10:24

63:25 111:17

126:13

extended 26:18

extent 12:4 50:23

54:20 65:10 76:19

77:19,21 78:9

79:23,25 115:25

154:6

extremely 51:7

66:8

E.J 89:4,13

F

face 107:4 169:15

fact 34:24 72:8 74:2

129:19 158:8

163:9,24 164:9

165:4,16 166:3,10

169:22 170:7

171:3,17,20

178:11 179:18

180:12 181:19

183:8

facts 80:6,9 141:4,4

176:16,19

factual 44:8,23

76:17 77:16 78:1

78:4,18 79:12,21

80:2,18 118:1,5

129:22 133:8,20

134:1,4 135:2,3,6

135:15 136:2

144:18 153:24

154:1,9,12 157:10

157:11 159:14

failure 11:22

failures 12:11

fair 23:7 24:6 40:6

73:15 83:21 88:20

103:25 104:7

109:24 110:20,20

116:7 118:19

119:7 127:13

132:2,11,24 134:3

134:7 135:7,11,12

135:14 137:5

140:14 146:17

170:5,20 171:16

171:19 179:2,15

185:21 190:6

fairly 162:8

fall 95:16

familiar 29:14 57:8

87:18 94:9 129:2

far 35:6,16 109:1

132:25 133:4

Fax 2:15,20 3:4,8

FC 4:22 5:11,14

Federal 11:1

fee 51:25

feel 74:22 110:18

feelings 23:5

fees 31:25 32:20

51:16 53:1

Feldman 18:10

felt 122:3

fiber 90:3

fibers 89:24 96:13

96:13

fibrous 157:7,14

Fifteenth 2:9

Figured 100:25

file 46:1 65:7,12,16

filed 12:1 40:5,10

45:20

files 42:25 43:20,23

65:5 87:5 88:1

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 201 of 218 PageID:

44120
Page 9

101:16 102:8

106:4,6,14 189:22

final 179:5

finalize 61:8

Finally 176:15

financial 52:15

financially 192:18

find 99:13 164:1,11

164:18 165:6,18

166:4,12 169:11

171:4,21 172:24

182:7 183:8

finding 162:21

fine 27:10 46:10

58:16 123:7

144:21 152:20

184:9 189:17

firm 11:21 14:9

16:4,6,7 18:4,9,19

32:23 33:15 34:2

34:3,12,15,23

35:7,14 65:25

66:24 115:22

130:14 132:1,11

132:14 133:2

148:21 154:8

185:16,16

firms 33:21 40:18

40:19,19 54:17

first 5:10 9:22

10:25 11:12,20

14:14 18:10,13

20:12,13 22:7

24:15 39:9 40:18

47:3 49:18 50:22

56:21 59:12,25

63:16 64:4 65:22

69:13,15 74:20

83:7 90:12,21

91:23 95:15 96:21

96:25 100:15,20

103:5 104:15

106:2,3 114:14,14

117:25 137:13,22

148:5,13 159:1

162:20 163:4,4

167:15 170:13

172:22 176:1,7

180:16

firsthand 120:3

134:8

fit 12:4

five 9:24 10:18

148:21

Fix 62:18

flakes 162:1,1

Fliegel 22:22 37:3

37:20

Fliegel's 37:12

flip 86:16

flipping 86:23

focus 39:25 82:25

161:7

follow 74:24 95:13

171:7

following 18:1

77:13 79:7 95:25

95:25 97:20

103:14 105:24

125:11 130:3

144:2 151:20

177:24 192:11

follows 8:13

foregoing 117:24

foreseeable 113:2

forgot 74:1 188:22

form 10:21 14:20

26:7 31:12 36:1

37:2 38:19 40:14

40:17 41:9,11,12

41:15,17 42:4,8

42:23 43:9,21

44:4 45:2,16,22

46:2,3 51:9,17,22

53:10 56:8,15,24

59:4 60:14 61:14

61:16 64:2,13,24

65:20 67:7,14

68:6,15 71:3,13

71:20 73:16 75:5

76:4,8 78:22

80:24 81:24,25

82:10,20 83:6

85:7,19,24 88:3,4

90:16,19 93:9

100:18 101:14

102:10 103:2,18

104:1 107:8,12

108:23 109:12,13

110:5,6 111:2,3

111:19,20,21

112:14 113:7

116:4,13 117:10

118:7,20,23,25

119:16,17,24

120:11,24 121:8,9

121:23,24 123:2,3

124:4,7 125:20

128:24 129:15,17

131:15 132:3,4,12

132:21 133:11,12

134:6,19 135:17

136:3 138:24

140:6,17 141:20

141:23,25 149:10

149:11 151:3,14

151:25 153:11,12

157:15 158:20,21

159:15 160:15

162:16,23 163:21

163:22 164:13

165:1,8 169:25

173:19 174:24

177:1,3,19 178:5

178:13,15 179:20

181:14,16 185:4

186:3,5

formal 21:13 74:11

74:12

formed 54:22

former 43:7,12

137:3,9 138:6

148:11 150:1

179:25 182:2

formerly 157:3

forming 162:1

forward 61:6

found 87:5,17

89:24 90:14 91:4

92:23 93:7 96:18

140:1 162:14,21

163:11,18,19

164:1 169:23

170:8 177:16

178:4,11 179:19

180:13 181:19

182:16

foundation 41:17

42:9 44:4 45:22

46:3 52:22 64:2

64:24 67:14 68:6

82:11 83:6 85:19

102:10 103:2,18

109:14 110:7

112:14 113:7

138:25 140:7

141:21,25 157:17

159:16

four 10:18 73:18

fourth 101:5

frame 25:14

framed 80:11

framing 80:13

freelance 19:24

front 69:8 72:2

86:24 91:21 94:25

105:2 114:11

147:14 153:19

155:22 160:25

167:1 168:16

172:21 187:12

full 115:6 137:22

fully 83:19 103:20

129:1 139:9

function 28:3

functions 25:11

funnel 116:7,17

furnished 148:8

further 96:1 105:18

146:21 192:10,14

G

G 93:22 94:2

Gale 4:18 95:2,6

96:17,22 126:22

128:20 129:11

130:7 133:9 149:8

Gale's 127:22

gears 154:14

general 14:1 18:21

20:13 21:20,20,23

25:17 26:8 27:22

28:1,6 31:24

34:18 35:22 36:2

36:3,15 41:20

42:11 44:6 46:6

47:18,22 48:1

49:4 51:7,10,18

52:13 53:11,19

56:9,22,23 63:10

65:18 68:16 71:15

71:22 83:13 90:7

101:21 102:5,14

109:22 115:10

120:25 122:16

134:13 150:14,20

150:21 151:1,8,12

151:23 160:18,19

generally 28:24

29:22 32:1 41:10

53:1 56:25 57:3

68:8 71:18 73:14

91:3 99:6 103:9

116:6 122:10

185:19

geologist 95:7

161:23

Georgia 89:25 90:8

96:4,7,8,12,18

getting 20:18 29:24

47:9,10,20 91:19

98:4 123:14

140:20 152:4

172:12 188:14

Gianna 14:9

Gideon 117:21

118:5,9 147:16

give 15:17 50:15

51:10 55:3 59:11

77:18 79:4 80:17

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 202 of 218 PageID:

44121
Page 10

116:9 129:7

139:10 152:7

169:16 171:1

178:21 184:16,16

given 63:14 141:14

giving 145:15

Glassley 161:23,24

162:3,21 163:1

166:19 177:16

178:4,11 179:18

180:12 181:19

182:7 183:8

Glenn 4:16 92:4

93:11,14,24

gloss 153:24

go 17:3,4 19:3 20:4

22:20 25:13 42:10

47:19 50:15 53:20

57:19 60:11 62:20

63:1 69:2 73:18

87:18 88:11 94:21

98:22 99:18,19

100:23 108:7

115:3 124:25

129:18 133:25

141:12 144:20

146:20 148:18

158:25 167:15,23

goes 60:11 63:20

105:18

going 9:16 12:24

13:1 29:21 39:25

48:6 50:20 62:5

63:5 74:22 78:24

81:6 87:6 92:14

95:9 124:14,15,18

124:19,19 126:25

129:23 133:25

142:4 144:9,10

145:23 152:5

153:10 154:13,15

166:13 172:20

175:15 179:6

181:6 183:16

184:5

gold 21:9

good 8:15,16,19

52:15 172:6

186:11 189:3

good-bye 171:10

Gordon 2:16 8:5

28:16,18,23 29:7

29:20 31:11 35:23

43:1 44:14,23

61:22 93:22 129:9

130:5 132:24

133:1 135:2 168:9

graduated 18:1

great 110:10 139:9

Grimm 5:6 167:12

grit 167:18

grounds 12:24

group 23:19,23

38:4 57:15 62:15

63:5 64:7,11

67:23

groups 23:20

guess 10:5 31:15

44:18 61:23 74:10

94:20 148:20

guesses 133:22,23

guessing 113:17

guest 124:21

guidance 97:9

guy 108:7

guys 86:5 99:16

G.A 89:5,11 105:4

H

H 4:7 5:1 8:12,12

167:12

Halket 3:9 8:9

93:23 94:8 190:16

Halket's 37:6

HAMILTON 2:13

hand 88:21

handful 136:6

handled 28:7 34:3

35:9,17 65:17

137:11,13

Hang 152:23

Hanovia 21:8

happen 156:8

happened 84:23,25

112:20 133:20,22

143:9

happens 147:10

happy 23:1

hard 58:11,12

139:16 150:3

152:1 162:8

harmless 76:12

Hassett 1:7,13 4:3

4:10,20,22,24 7:3

7:24 8:15 9:17

10:3,19 13:7

14:14 17:2,25

27:11 50:10 58:2

63:3 69:8 72:2,22

77:10 78:15 79:9

85:17 86:23 90:24

91:21 94:25 100:5

105:2 114:2,11

115:9,15 127:20

128:13 142:21

145:17 147:14

149:16 150:13

152:22 155:22

157:19 160:25

167:1,14 168:16

178:19 181:13

184:12 186:22

190:23,25

Hassett-1 4:9 9:18

10:1

Hassett-1A 4:12

186:19,23 187:13

Hassett-10 168:17

172:21

Hassett-11 69:9

Hassett-5 58:3

185:14 186:2

Hassett-7 176:12

headquarters

18:20 26:13

health 19:11

hear 164:23

heard 37:6 55:10

58:21 86:1,1

87:22 89:12,17,17

94:10 100:16,19

hearing 61:6

held 9:10 149:3

help 12:1 20:13

99:15 183:24

helped 131:13

132:9

helpful 74:22

Hemstock 4:16

89:5,11 92:4,7

93:6,11,14,24

105:4 126:22

127:21 128:20

129:10 130:7,25

131:11 132:2

133:9,17 149:8

HEROLD 3:6

Hey 154:17

high 46:25

highlighted 89:20

92:15 93:21

Hilton 26:25

historical 120:5

hobby-type 19:24

hold 56:6,6 61:3

81:14 111:22

142:12

honest 121:6,21

122:23 123:25

125:17

honestly 39:18 62:9

79:18

hope 123:24 125:15

131:21

hoping 129:22

Hotel 26:25

hours 146:25

house 154:23

Howard 33:5 35:12

35:17 93:22 94:2

98:14 99:4 155:8

155:10 159:10

160:6 168:19

173:14 175:20

Howard's 35:14

173:22

Huene 162:5

Human 25:9

Hyde 87:23

hygiene 126:14

hypothetical 122:8

122:16 129:21

hypotheticals

129:24 141:3,13

H'mm 57:11

I

identification 9:17

58:3 72:3 86:25

91:17,22 94:18

95:1 105:3 114:5

114:12 147:15

155:23 161:1

167:2 168:18

175:16 186:20,24

187:13

identified 96:13

128:22 161:25

identifies 72:13,14

148:21

identify 127:25

ifs 126:3

II's 5:17

implemented

104:15

impression 102:12

146:10 152:13,19

181:3

impressions 69:25

123:6,15 128:9

141:10 145:8,12

145:15 149:13,19

149:23,24 173:8

177:4 178:21

179:24 180:10,15

181:10 182:1

183:13

improper 141:13

143:13 144:17

include 48:1 63:23

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 203 of 218 PageID:

44122
Page 11

109:2 126:2

127:25

included 47:5,7

60:4 76:10 85:14

101:22 108:17

including 53:1 60:5

77:24 93:11

131:17 158:8

176:17

inclusion 177:11

income 19:25

incoming 42:20

incomplete 119:15

inconsistent 139:4

incorporated

136:12

incorrect 121:11,16

122:2,15

increased 169:14

increases 60:4

Independence 3:7

independent 90:6

169:10

index 68:17,20

69:24 70:16

indexes 68:14 70:3

70:10

indicate 48:22

Indicates 86:19

indicating 85:18

individual 51:16

54:15

individuals 120:6

industrial 18:19

126:14

industries 18:14

20:5,23 21:24

24:11

information 15:24

28:17,23 30:11,25

31:11,14 36:11

42:25 43:2 44:8

44:24 45:6 46:21

47:1,6,20 48:3,15

72:15,17 74:17

76:20,23 77:20,21

77:24 78:10 80:12

85:10 106:4

115:24 116:7,9

119:22 120:3,5,6

120:19,21 121:2,5

121:17,20 122:2

122:11,22 123:25

125:16 132:14,18

132:23 133:2

134:25 135:4,7,15

136:2,11,15,17

137:2,4,9 150:22

153:15,18 154:12

156:13 157:21,23

171:13 173:11

176:18

initial 31:24 32:12

84:8

initially 188:6

initiated 11:10

74:11 104:18

107:23 155:6

initiation 104:20

injuries 64:7

injury 10:23 64:15

110:21,22 112:13

113:3,3

input 108:16

inquiries 32:6

inquiring 50:16

inquiry 122:1

insist 176:23 177:8

inspections 73:6

84:10,12

instance 174:12

Institute 90:8

instruct 13:1,4

47:21 48:6 50:14

50:20 51:2 76:21

77:22 78:24 80:1

81:8 123:12 127:1

146:13 152:6,15

154:3 180:21,22

183:16,17 184:6,8

instructed 13:21

instructing 152:10

instruction 51:5

77:19 78:3,15

79:10 80:14

146:16 152:21

166:16 184:3,11

instructions 55:3

instruments 95:17

insurance 9:6,7

49:2,7,15 50:12

51:13 67:19,20

insure 120:9

insured 128:21

intended 153:7

173:15,16

intent 106:12

intention 173:22

intentionally

119:13

interact 31:19,23

49:2

interacted 49:9

94:5

interacting 32:16

33:4 35:13

interaction 34:11

34:15

interactions 34:8

34:17 49:14 50:12

51:12 62:1 74:25

interested 23:4

135:22 189:18

192:18

intermingled

167:25

internal 32:10

150:10

Interoffice 4:12 5:8

interpret 140:20

143:12 153:17

178:17 179:24

Interrog 117:3

139:1

Interrogatories

5:11,13,19 15:21

114:15 115:8

116:3,11,20 117:4

117:7,9,25 119:5

120:6,7 121:4,19

126:6 127:24

130:16 131:14

132:10,19 133:3,7

134:1,5 135:6,16

135:19,24 136:1

139:2,15 143:3,4

147:23 148:2,14

155:25 156:6,14

156:18 159:13,20

160:10 161:3

169:4,6

Interrogatory

66:11 115:5 124:2

125:18,24 126:1,8

126:24 127:20

128:1,11,22

129:14 130:10

133:10 137:21

140:15 156:11

161:15

interrupt 12:25

interview 11:7,13

11:15,20

introduction 37:7

94:11 171:10

inventories 23:24

inventory 9:10

149:3

investigation 16:14

89:6

inviting 111:25

involved 16:9 20:19

28:10 29:10,12

31:2 32:18 33:12

36:16,18 37:4

44:17 51:19 53:14

61:23 67:15,24

82:2 83:8,10,23

83:25 101:19

111:7,10 120:2

131:21 136:9

159:4 192:16

involvement 37:8

154:11

involving 111:17

113:3

in-house 35:23

37:10 38:9,16

39:2,7 40:2 53:12

108:6 111:15

150:1 152:2 177:5

184:21

Ira 2:17 8:5 29:9

55:21

Island 35:16 91:25

155:9,10

issue 98:23 144:13

144:15 145:13

146:8,9 150:23

182:4

issued 105:12

issues 29:24 50:16

50:17 54:5 61:7

172:12

Italian 183:1

item 99:12 162:19

J

J 1:14 8:12 72:22

115:9,15 192:5,23

Jack 32:17 33:9,11

33:11,11 54:4

JAD 1:2

JAMES 1:7,13 4:3

Japan 9:11

Jared 2:2 4:3 7:18

7:20 8:14,17 13:5

13:13 47:12,16

49:18,22 50:9

56:18,20,23 57:19

58:1,16 61:5

64:20 66:16,20

67:3 68:24 76:7

77:2,9,25 78:13

78:14 79:1,5 80:5

80:15 86:4,22

87:14 88:20 91:18

94:19,23 97:11,18

99:14,17,21 100:4

102:13,22 104:23

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 204 of 218 PageID:

44123
Page 12

112:2,8 113:18

114:1,7 123:7,11

124:11,21,23

125:7 127:3,9,13

127:17,19 129:25

134:15 135:9

137:24 140:22

141:6,20 142:3,19

142:24 143:15,17

143:18,22,25

144:12,21 145:2,9

145:23 146:2,6,14

146:15,20,23

147:1,4,6,11,13

149:18,20 150:5,8

150:10,16,19

151:7,19,24 152:5

152:9,14,20

160:24 165:14

166:1,23 167:10

171:8 172:4

173:12 175:18

176:11 178:6,16

179:23 180:1,20

181:4,6,9 182:21

182:24 183:11,15

183:21,25 184:4,9

184:10 186:12,21

187:9 188:20,21

188:25 190:12,20

190:23

Jersey 1:1,10,16

2:5,19 3:3,7 7:6

7:10 17:16,17,22

18:20 33:20,22,25

34:1,12 192:7,24

JLL 1:2

jmplacitella@cp...

2:6

JNJ-Ros 4:19

job 20:8 23:1 27:21

27:25 31:16 32:22

37:12 38:7 74:8

74:10 92:10

186:11

Johnson 73:7 84:10

84:12,14,17,20

93:7 95:16 96:17

138:9,12,20

139:22 140:1

142:7 144:5 157:5

161:22,24 162:2

162:14,22 163:11

163:20 164:1,11

164:19 165:6,18

166:5 167:16,25

169:12,23 170:9

171:5,21 172:25

178:12 179:19

180:13 181:20

183:9

join 13:3 40:15

44:5 46:4 71:5

118:25 119:25

120:12 125:21

131:16 159:17

162:24 177:21

joined 18:10,13,18

20:5

JR 2:9

judgment 45:14,18

45:20,24 46:1,9

111:24 127:2

130:19,20 141:10

151:5,25 173:4

judgments 123:5

jumped 159:22

June 161:4

juris 35:13

jurisdictions 33:8

33:16

jury 169:11 172:24

justify 64:15

K

K 2:9

Karwacki 3:11

7:12

keep 47:24 52:11

64:22 68:2 154:15

keeping 151:18

Kimberlee 1:3 7:4

kind 28:9 41:20

54:22 68:8 70:13

75:2 100:11,20

103:6 112:2

144:19 151:4,25

183:3

Kirkland 2:8 7:25

8:2 12:16,19

13:11 14:10

Kluznik 32:17 33:9

33:11 54:4

knew 26:6 32:11,14

32:17,21,23,24

64:17 66:8,9,12

73:14 121:10

122:1,1,21 125:24

128:20 130:17

132:1 133:17

139:13

know 10:19 12:25

13:6 16:22 18:21

18:23 20:18 21:11

22:11 25:23,23

26:14 28:13 29:10

29:15 30:3 33:14

36:10,19 37:4,5,5

37:7,8,10,12,23

38:12,13 39:1,14

39:17 42:10 47:2

48:16 50:19,19

51:20,23 52:15

53:2,3,23 54:11

55:1,2,11,18 57:8

57:12,14,16,18

58:20 61:18,19,21

61:21,25 62:4,7

62:13,14,14 63:3

63:3,13,24 64:6,9

64:14,16 65:1,4

66:21,21,23,23

67:16,18,24 68:1

68:10,12,16 70:3

70:8 73:23 74:7

74:10,19 75:10,17

75:19,21 76:13,16

77:16 79:23 83:13

83:15 84:2,11,13

84:19,22,24 85:15

85:20,21 86:7

88:8 89:11,13,18

92:10 93:13,16

94:11 95:6 98:24

99:11 101:20

102:1,16 103:9,22

104:19,23 107:1

107:10,14 108:3

108:11 109:1,19

109:23 110:8,9,12

110:18 111:8,10

112:21,22,22

113:11,12 117:12

117:25 118:8,15

119:3 121:25

122:4,12,13 126:2

127:14 128:12

129:1,8,22 131:24

131:25 132:5,6,15

132:22,25 133:4,4

133:16,18,19,20

134:3,21 135:25

136:10,14 137:7,8

137:14,18 140:11

141:5 143:6,16

148:6 153:13,20

154:1,7 155:7,17

156:19,22 157:22

158:15,24 159:8

159:11,24 160:2,5

160:8,12,17 163:6

163:23 164:8,14

165:20 167:5

170:16,24 171:12

173:14,17,21

174:25 175:3,6,7

175:11 180:1,17

184:15,25 185:1,6

185:9,12 186:12

189:7,20,21,21,23

189:25 190:1,3

knowing 75:18

112:19,20 127:21

139:25 170:24

knowledge 38:12

73:1,21 84:9 85:5

101:6 111:11

116:2 118:11

120:5 122:17

129:22 133:24

134:8,14,23

137:16 139:3

144:18 158:1

174:6,9,21 190:5

190:10

known 109:16

138:7 157:3

171:14 175:12

knows 99:9 102:16

139:11

L

L 3:10 8:12

labor 35:22 130:14

132:15

laboratories 90:6

90:14 95:18 96:4

lack 154:19

land 26:24

language 153:25

large 167:19

larger 20:10 64:15

late 9:2 27:8,16

38:20,21

lately 12:6

law 3:6 17:4,5,6,8

17:14 18:1 54:17

71:24 108:9 132:1

132:10 133:2

lawsuit 20:16,20

72:15 176:17

189:4

lawsuit/claims

189:22

lawyer 16:4 18:21

18:23 22:22 24:7

37:7 39:8 108:6

119:14 120:18

130:13,15,16

143:6 149:13,19

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 205 of 218 PageID:

44124
Page 13

150:1 152:2

164:17 168:25

171:20 177:5,14

178:2,18 179:25

180:10,16 181:2

182:2 183:13

lawyers 39:22 40:2

41:6,14 45:25

76:2,6,7 82:17

114:9 118:17

120:4 129:12,12

130:8,9

lawyer's 20:8

law-related 19:25

lead 20:18 80:13

142:18

learn 97:5,23

learned 28:13

71:16 85:13 97:2

163:4,4 166:17

learning 90:13

leave 22:6 50:2

63:15 97:15 99:25

125:4

leaves 12:11

led 11:13 153:22

155:11 177:12

left 19:22 30:12

174:11 184:7

190:3

legal 1:23 7:13,14

18:14,15,24 20:5

24:6 32:10 36:24

39:2,3,12,14

52:14 53:1,7,12

53:17 56:4 57:2,6

65:11 68:9 73:5

73:21 78:1 80:16

83:21 84:25 94:14

102:19 107:6,25

108:4,15 111:15

111:24 112:3,11

113:5,9 123:5

127:2 141:10

144:19 149:23

151:4,5,25,25

174:22 178:25

181:25 184:21

188:25

legally 88:7

Len 29:14,15 55:21

length 90:4

Les 22:22,24 37:3

37:12,19 38:22

letter 4:20,22,24

5:15 34:24 36:6

41:18,19 58:4,6,7

59:8,12,18 62:12

63:16 64:3 66:5

66:23 69:24 74:12

147:16,19 148:1,5

148:20,20 150:9

150:11,24 153:17

153:19,22,25

155:7 159:22

168:18 169:2,9,17

170:1 173:22,25

175:20,23

letterhead 16:6

66:1

letters 15:22 16:2

16:10 34:20 40:22

40:25 41:3,7,13

41:15 42:11 58:4

58:21,24 59:9

65:6

letter's 147:22

letter-type 65:21

66:3 83:14

let's 14:12 24:13

25:13 52:3 61:3

85:2 113:19

123:11 124:25

126:5 137:12

177:7 186:13

level 25:11,12

46:25

leveraged 22:25

liability 5:10 39:7,8

114:15 117:25

148:14

License 192:25

licensed 17:14,18

light 139:11 169:14

limitation 176:18

limited 28:8 43:1

55:9 143:21

line 6:2,8 12:10

95:12 124:20

129:23 140:20

141:17,18

lines 105:19

liquid 21:9

list 4:20 131:3

listed 72:21 105:25

109:6

lists 59:14 63:23

148:14

litiga 84:3

litigants 81:21

litigation 9:5 27:12

27:18,20,25 28:20

28:22 29:1,8,12

30:8 31:8 32:24

32:25 35:2,25

36:15,25 37:9,15

37:16,21 38:10,18

39:4,7,13 40:3,23

41:1 42:24 43:4,8

43:11,14,15,19,22

43:25 44:11,12

45:3,4,8,11,15,21

46:6,8,13 47:25

49:2 51:12 55:12

56:14,17,25 57:4

68:5,13,20 70:23

71:9,17 73:10

75:4 82:17 83:4

84:4 94:6 101:8

101:23 102:2,7,8

102:24,24 103:6,9

103:15,16,16,25

108:22 109:1,8

113:2 129:5 136:5

140:24 150:2

188:11,16

litigations 34:18

70:1,4 73:6,22

76:2 136:20

little 15:4 23:2

29:10 39:25 66:1

112:6 154:20

LLC 1:6,17 2:12,18

5:4 7:4

LLM 17:7,11

LLP 2:8,13

local 28:17 30:14

30:24 31:4,7,10

31:16,19,23 32:9

32:11,11,15 33:3

34:8 35:24 36:8

36:17,20 43:1

50:23 51:3 61:22

74:15 75:1,3,11

78:17 79:11 82:3

82:7,13,21 116:8

155:7,10 160:13

164:17 165:10,13

168:12 171:23

locally 30:2

located 138:9 157:5

log 5:4 69:10 175:8

Logan 2:14

logical 120:1

long 14:16 15:2

19:5 24:8,14 39:5

149:2 183:3

longer 105:16

look 10:13 20:25

49:7 61:6 66:14

67:2 86:20 87:7

114:16 129:2

131:5 144:9

looked 34:20

131:11 139:4

140:8

looking 65:24

66:22 96:10

107:21 130:15

140:11 188:19

looks 63:17 87:18

187:16

Lopez 167:3

loss 9:9,9

lost 88:17 161:7

lot 12:5,10

lunch 88:11,13

100:23 108:19

113:19 114:3

Luncheon 113:22

Lynn 58:9

M

M 2:2,3,18 8:12,12

magic 151:16

Magna 1:23 7:13

7:14

Magnesia 5:13,20

155:24 157:3

161:3

magnesite 95:21

maintain 101:23

108:25 131:23

maintained 28:18

44:14,23 52:13

maintaining 52:21

making 67:16,25

mal 63:24

malignant 63:24

64:10

man 21:7

managed 23:24

Management 23:21

manager 159:2,8

managing 30:16,19

mandatory 155:14

Manual 4:13

Maple 2:5

March 12:13 92:4

105:5

Marino 3:2 8:6

Mark 117:21 118:5

147:16,16

marked 9:16 58:3

69:9 72:3 86:25

91:17,22 94:18

95:1 105:3 114:5

114:12 147:15

155:23 161:1

167:2 168:17

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 206 of 218 PageID:

44125
Page 14

175:15 185:2

186:19,23 187:12

marker 151:16

Market 2:4

Martillotta 58:6

Martin 35:21 49:8

49:15 50:13 52:9

97:3,5,23 98:6,8

98:20 100:9

154:21,24 155:4

155:25 156:4

161:4 162:12

163:7,10,18,25

164:10,18 165:5

165:17 166:4,10

166:11,20 168:25

169:23 170:6,8,18

170:25 174:2,10

174:16,18 175:11

175:21 176:3

178:8,10,23 179:7

179:12,17 180:11

180:25 184:25

185:6,8,24,25

Martin's 5:19

161:2 170:3

material 150:22

182:22

materials 75:3,8,10

75:15 76:10,11,13

76:16 77:15 78:7

78:17 79:11 82:5

82:7,14 83:15,18

85:14 88:12 148:8

148:12 154:9

matter 7:3 71:15

122:18 133:20

150:15,20,21

151:1,8,13,23

169:18

matters 30:2 32:14

51:16 169:17

Maura 39:10

McWilliams 108:5

108:12,13 190:4

mean 12:25 19:6

25:20 30:18,22

32:2 54:7 56:12

57:9 66:8 68:16

75:7 87:15 106:3

107:3 110:8,13

115:17 121:15

125:22 133:16

135:12 137:7

142:17 150:22

151:1,8,13,23

153:1,20 159:21

170:16 175:6

189:19 190:2

meaning 181:25

means 116:6,19

173:18 189:8,13

meant 115:21

mechanism 28:7

mediation 155:14

159:22 170:19,23

171:2,12,17,20

172:8,10,14

meet 8:18,19 14:3,6

meeting 12:2,15,20

12:22 13:10

Mel 16:5 32:23

33:15 34:2,3,12

34:17,21 65:25

66:23

Mel's 33:20 34:15

memo 87:23 89:4

106:24 107:4,5,11

107:15,19

memoranda 105:4

Memorandum 4:12

5:8

Menlo 26:13,16

mental 69:25 70:8

102:12 123:5,6,15

128:9 141:10

145:8,12,15

146:10 149:13,18

149:24 152:12,19

173:7 177:4

178:21 179:24

180:10,15 181:3

181:10 182:1

183:13

mention 74:1

mentioned 22:24

54:3 57:16 65:7

179:12

men's 76:25

merged 18:5

Merten 4:24 33:5

35:12 98:14 99:4

155:8,10 160:6

168:12,19 169:9

172:1,2 173:14

175:21

met 14:7,21 55:2

metal 9:10 23:24

metals 23:21,25

24:4,9,11 38:4

Michael 1:7,13 4:3

4:10 7:3,24 10:2

29:6 55:15 58:5,9

60:21 69:20 72:21

115:9,15 185:15

190:25

micro 162:4

microbe 162:4

microns 90:4

microphone 25:1

62:18 88:17

156:24

microprobe 162:8

microscopy 96:2,2

middle 22:9 116:18

Middlebury 161:23

167:17

middleman 154:12

Mike 28:24 29:21

46:24 47:8 48:7

48:14 55:4,5,13

65:2 70:6 111:22

milling 157:4

mind 125:9 186:13

mine 58:13,14 73:6

84:10,12,14,17,20

92:19,24 93:7

136:16 138:8,10

138:11,11,12,14

138:20,22 139:22

139:23 140:2

142:7,9 144:5,7

157:5,6,12 161:22

161:24 162:2,15

162:22 163:11,20

164:2,11,19 165:7

165:18 166:5

167:16,19,20

168:1 169:12,23

170:9 171:5,22

172:25 178:12

179:19 180:13

181:20 182:3,8

183:9

mining 157:4

minute 53:21 65:25

127:11 172:21

mischaracterize

127:15

misleading 119:15

Misstates 90:20

misunderstood

134:22

MIT 17:5

mixed 23:5

Mm'mm 11:11,19

13:13 15:6 18:12

18:17 21:2 26:17

35:8 38:5 42:2

46:16 47:4 57:17

59:21 62:11 63:11

64:5 65:14,23

66:6 67:22 68:18

70:14 101:18

102:3 113:14

115:20 118:14

131:19 134:10

139:6 170:14

Monday 14:21,21

14:23 15:7,11

money 174:7 185:9

month 22:4 23:15

months 22:12

Morgan 18:5

morning 8:15,16

95:15 149:9

motion 45:18,24

motions 45:14,19

46:1,8

mouth 151:18

move 84:6 85:2

moved 26:24 33:21

multiple 54:19,19

Multi-page 4:14

5:3,5,12

N

N 2:1,22 3:1,10 4:1

95:2

nail 33:7 163:8

name 8:17 12:17

16:5,6 23:22

29:13,15 37:6

39:9,10 66:1

72:21 89:12,17,18

94:9 115:6 162:25

named 16:5 22:22

names 16:9 39:20

39:21 63:22

156:12

national 30:9

nature 29:18 31:9

49:14 50:12 157:7

157:14

necessarily 40:7

41:11 109:2

116:17 118:18

150:3

need 31:10 42:4

47:13 49:20,20

69:2 72:8 81:8

97:7,8 106:15

124:16,16 141:16

143:16 144:14,15

146:21,25 147:2

151:5 153:12

164:23,23 180:19

183:12,21 188:12

needed 30:14 36:21

42:16 43:2 103:12

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 207 of 218 PageID:

44126
Page 15

105:16 115:24

116:9 149:24

needs 177:6

negotiating 20:14

negotiation 177:10

neither 192:15,16

never 27:17 34:24

55:2,2 75:12

87:15 93:10 120:2

137:3

new 1:1,10,16 2:5

2:19 3:3,7 7:6,10

17:15,16,17,17,21

17:22 18:4,9,20

33:20,22,25 34:1

34:12 37:25 42:25

108:9 110:10

187:2 192:7,24

Newark 21:9

nice 8:17

nicer 153:5

nonactive 19:18

nonattorney 39:11

119:9

nonmalignant

63:25 64:10

nontalc 32:14

nontire 65:4 67:8

74:6 82:3 83:12

136:6

normal 44:7

Notary 1:15 8:13

192:6,24

note 58:24

Notice 4:9 9:19,23

10:2

noticed 59:12

November 167:15

number 4:8 5:2 7:2

52:2 59:17 96:9

96:10 115:7

126:18 128:23

129:14 130:11

133:10 137:21

138:12,19 139:21

142:7 144:5

156:11 161:5

174:5 185:22

numbers 51:25

NYU 17:7,12

N.W 2:9

O

O 3:10

object 10:21 12:24

14:20 65:20 71:3

71:13 78:20 81:24

81:25 85:24 88:3

88:4 90:16,17

109:12 110:5,6

111:2 120:8 124:7

140:18 149:10,11

153:10,12 157:13

158:21 162:23

163:22 165:8

177:2 178:13

179:20,22 181:14

181:16,23 186:3,5

objected 141:22

objection 26:7 36:1

37:2 38:19 40:14

41:9,17 42:8,23

43:9,21 44:4,21

45:2,16,22 46:3

51:9,17,22 52:22

53:10 56:8,15,24

59:4 60:14 61:14

61:16 64:2,13,24

67:7,14 68:4,6,15

71:2,20,21 73:16

75:5 76:4,8 78:22

80:24 82:10,20

83:6 85:7,19

90:19 91:20 93:9

100:18 101:14

102:10 103:2,18

104:1 107:8,12

108:23 109:13

111:1,3,19,20,21

112:1,14 113:7

116:4,13 117:8,10

118:7,20,23,24

119:16,17,24

120:11,24 121:8,9

121:23,24 123:1,2

124:4 125:20

128:24 129:15,16

129:17 131:2,15

132:3,4,12,21

133:11,12 134:6

134:19 135:8,17

136:3 138:24

140:6,17 141:21

151:3,14 157:15

158:2,20 159:15

160:15 162:16

163:21 164:13

165:1 169:25

173:19 174:24

177:1,17,19 178:5

178:15 185:4

objections 160:7

obligation 88:9

121:5,20 122:22

obliged 88:7

observed 162:2

obvious 67:1 74:3

occasion 19:20

20:16

occasionally 108:8

occasions 96:9

occurred 22:17

84:2 104:21

132:16 148:25

161:25 188:4

occurs 167:24

October 12:7,9,12

138:10

offer 100:12 102:18

140:21 153:24

offering 19:8

office 1:16 25:10

33:13,20 45:13,19

154:24

officer 115:7

119:12 121:7,22

122:24 124:1

125:18 127:4

133:7 143:2 192:1

officers 126:11

offices 26:9,20

33:22

official 25:15,25

oh 12:9 21:7 26:14

37:24 51:2 117:19

189:11

Ohio 33:9,13 54:16

okay 10:1,19 14:18

15:14 16:23 24:25

25:5 26:2,22

27:15 28:5 33:15

38:23 40:12 56:3

56:7,22 59:24

61:2,19 62:4

63:21 65:21 69:7

69:12 70:17 72:20

75:20,24 78:13

80:4,21 83:20

88:18,24 89:3,10

89:13,16 90:24

91:15 94:21 98:24

100:1,5,21,25

103:7 104:5,11,14

104:17 105:1,11

105:14,22 106:10

106:22 107:24

109:7 112:18

113:18 114:19

117:17 118:17

119:7 122:7

123:13 126:7,25

129:9,25 131:9

136:9 137:19

138:4 140:14

143:22 146:14,19

146:23 147:6,22

148:4 154:1,15,16

157:24 158:25

159:12 161:13

164:23 167:9

171:16 173:23

185:8 186:10,25

187:4,11,14,15,20

188:5,8 190:18

old 15:25 38:2

once 10:10 28:9

102:7 149:12

169:21

ones 137:11,12

One-page 4:12,20

4:22 5:8

open 103:12 110:9

opening 23:3

159:22 172:23

operated 138:8

operation 23:25

105:17 167:20

operations 105:6

105:24 106:5,13

106:20 159:3,4

opine 162:14

163:10,19

opinion 128:15,16

139:10 142:16

144:19 151:4

152:1 181:25

opposed 31:17 59:7

opposing 40:22

41:14,15

ORAL 1:5

Orange 1:10 2:19

7:10

order 61:8 78:23

164:21

ore 84:16 92:19,24

93:7 167:18

originally 23:2

outdated 105:18

outgoing 41:24,25

42:18

outside 15:23 16:2

20:18,20 28:14

30:2 48:19 49:21

76:6,7 124:18

127:7 174:22

outsourced 83:22

84:3

overlapped 94:12

override 103:13

oversee 84:16

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 208 of 218 PageID:

44127
Page 16

P

P 2:1,1,22,22 3:1,1

3:10 189:10,11,13

pack 75:16

package 59:20

75:12,14,17 85:13

87:10

Paduano 32:24

35:4 115:22

132:10,20 133:2

154:8

Paduano's 130:14

132:14

page 2:22 4:8 5:2

6:2,8 10:4,5 59:17

59:19 60:20 63:17

63:18 69:11 72:12

72:19 91:23 92:15

93:18 95:10 96:9

115:4 117:16

126:5 137:19,22

137:25 148:19

159:2 161:14

167:23 172:7,23

176:1,9,14,14

179:6,6 184:22,23

188:8,15,20,21

189:1

pages 114:18

paid 62:15 174:7

177:14,18 178:3,9

185:10

paragraph 59:25

60:19 89:20 90:21

105:23 106:2,3

137:22 148:5,19

148:19 158:25

159:1 161:18

169:8 172:22

paragraphs 140:12

paralegal 39:15

55:16

Park 26:13,16

part 21:10 50:24

64:4 74:9 134:22

161:9 179:16

participate 42:21

45:13,14 120:19

participated

170:19

participating 45:17

45:23

participation 42:25

particular 48:2

102:6,25 115:19

117:1 131:25

152:3 153:21,24

160:1 180:8

parties 7:15 54:20

176:15 192:16

partner 29:11

parts 134:12

party 59:8

Pasadena 162:5

pass 190:13

passed 36:15

108:13

Pat 77:12 79:6

97:18 125:9

134:15 145:4

path 18:1

Patricia 1:14 7:14

192:5,23

pattern 112:3,10

113:4

Pause 10:11 25:4

58:17 62:22 71:25

86:3,21 91:16

94:17 104:25

142:13 160:22

166:22 167:6

168:14 174:17

175:17 176:10

Pavlick 3:2 8:6,6

190:17

pay 19:7 62:5 63:5

182:9

paying 174:3

payment 175:2,5

179:7,13

payments 65:3 68:8

PC 2:2

pending 69:6 77:11

102:1 108:22,25

109:8,16 110:3,9

110:14 111:12,17

112:13,17 113:15

125:8 145:3

Pennsylvania 2:4

2:15 16:8

people 60:12

122:18 175:1

182:17

PEPPER 2:13

performed 96:1,7

161:19,21

period 19:13,18

21:1,22 24:22

38:13 65:8 83:25

101:24,25 103:22

103:24 104:3

periodic 54:3

periodically 74:7

permanent 189:13

permitted 103:10

103:13

persist 124:20

144:10

person 156:12

personal 116:2

134:13,23 137:16

157:25

personally 32:21

54:6 70:16

personnel 29:19

39:12 105:5 109:5

119:9 164:2,8

pertained 102:8

pertaining 27:20

27:24 53:5 102:24

103:16 106:5

107:10 108:21

109:9 111:16

pertains 105:23

179:5

Peter 2:17 4:18 8:5

29:9 55:21 69:21

94:3,5 95:2,6

96:22 121:14,17

122:5 130:25

131:8,12,20 132:7

petrographic 162:4

Philadelphia 2:4,15

Phillip 3:2 8:6

phone 50:4 118:10

190:15

phrase 83:2 152:17

phrased 102:18

123:10 124:8

183:14,18

physical 23:24

picking 188:15

pile 140:12

Pita 138:7 157:2

158:6

Pita's 159:4

place 12:1 170:25

188:6 192:13

placed 106:6

Placitella 2:2,2,3

4:3 7:11,18,20,21

7:22 8:14,17 13:5

13:13 47:12,16

49:18,22 50:9

56:18,20,23 57:19

58:1,16 61:5

64:20 66:16,20

67:3 68:24 76:7

77:2,9,25 78:13

78:14 79:1,5 80:5

80:15 86:4,22

87:14 88:20 91:18

94:19,23 97:11,18

99:14,17,21 100:4

102:13,22 104:23

112:2,8 113:18

114:1,7 123:7,11

124:11,21,23

125:7 127:3,9,13

127:17,19 129:25

134:15 135:9

137:24 140:22

141:6,20 142:3,19

142:24 143:15,18

143:22,25 144:12

144:21 145:2,9,23

146:2,6,14,15,20

146:23 147:1,4,6

147:11,13 149:20

150:5,8,10,16,19

151:7 152:5,9,14

152:20 153:4

160:24 165:14

166:1,23 167:10

171:8 172:4

173:12 175:18

176:11 178:6

180:1,20 181:4,6

182:21,24 183:15

183:21,25 184:4,9

184:10 186:12,21

187:9 188:21,25

190:12,20,23

plain 140:15

149:21

plaintiff 5:18 31:15

54:15 70:24 71:11

74:2 99:2 161:2

162:13 163:9

170:3 171:7,11,25

plaintiffs 1:4 2:7

5:10 7:20 30:25

31:13 41:3 54:17

54:18 55:3 60:3

63:23 64:7 74:2

82:4 97:25 98:17

98:19 100:8,10

119:20 163:17

164:9,17 165:5,16

166:4,11 169:22

170:7 171:3,20,25

177:14 178:2

plaintiff's 5:13

114:14 150:6

155:25 158:7,14

163:5,24 166:10

168:25 171:11

planning 146:22

147:9

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 209 of 218 PageID:

44128
Page 17

plans 19:11,12

plant 159:2,8

platinum 21:6

Pleading 67:10

Pleadings 65:10

please 7:17 8:11

60:19,23 71:6

77:12 86:15 93:17

101:3 106:11

116:15 117:16

120:15 128:3

137:19 145:4

167:4 169:16

177:23 180:3,18

plenty 141:14

plus 189:7

point 12:23 25:17

26:23 27:1 30:12

36:12 37:14 52:1

84:6 88:23 129:23

169:15

policies 103:8

107:18 190:5

policy 16:1 65:9,16

66:7 101:22

102:14,23 103:5

103:14,21 104:4,7

104:12,15,18,20

105:14 106:20

107:22,24 108:1,4

108:17,20,24

109:10 110:3,24

111:6,8,12 113:11

187:17,24 188:2,4

188:5 190:10

portion 92:15

115:1

Pos 22:11

position 80:6 102:7

115:7 139:10

169:14,24

positive 21:17

49:10

Poss 105:13

possession 120:18

121:3,18 122:21

123:23 125:15

129:9 130:6

132:19 136:25

possible 49:4,6

70:15 169:18

possibly 22:11 74:9

129:6 144:20

187:22,23

potential 73:1

110:10

power 11:22,23

12:10

ppavlick@khma...

3:4

practice 17:14,22

53:25 108:24

111:12 112:10,16

113:4

practiced 20:1

precedent 189:11

189:18,22

preceding 15:7

precious 23:21,24

23:25 24:4,9,11

precluded 180:11

preliminary 157:1

prep 14:11,15,18

14:24,24,25 15:11

65:6 89:18 104:5

preparation 16:24

34:21 85:12

187:20

prepare 14:4

prepared 59:7

100:12 117:24

163:10

preparing 159:20

160:5

presence 92:19

95:21 96:12

present 7:15

130:25

presented 114:25

169:22 170:7

preservation

103:10,21,24

preserve 102:2

103:12

preserved 106:13

112:21

PRESS 187:14

pretty 55:9,9 61:17

83:21 87:10

115:25

prevail 173:4

previous 40:20

98:18

previously 74:18

169:5

primer 72:8

printout 68:10

prior 32:21 148:6

192:7

privilege 5:4 12:25

13:4 47:11 51:4

69:10,13 78:24

88:8 97:8 98:3,23

122:4 130:20

133:18 144:13,15

164:21 172:12

privileged 4:15

29:24 47:1,20

48:15,18 76:20,23

77:20,21,24 78:10

79:25 80:3,6,12

80:17,25 81:7,12

87:2 153:15 154:4

157:19 166:14

171:24 172:16

proactive 36:13

probably 9:2 11:24

23:5 55:22 57:18

65:2 72:11 74:5

75:22 135:22

problem 47:17

142:14 149:25

procedure 46:9

54:22,25

procedures 55:12

55:19 59:2

proceedings 31:12

process 53:16 57:7

57:9 64:16 112:3

120:2 155:11

processed 92:18,23

produce 19:25

produced 138:9,14

138:21 139:23

142:9 144:7

product 39:6 70:24

71:1,10,12 93:8

102:11 111:25

112:4 123:16

124:9,12 140:21

140:22 141:24

144:20 173:7

177:4 182:2

production 6:1

90:2

products 39:8

148:25

professional 17:18

proposition 150:23

propound 42:6

propounded 5:19

41:23 161:3

protect 78:23

164:21

protection 21:5

prove 70:25 71:11

150:23

provide 17:2 30:13

75:2 77:23 79:21

79:24 82:7 119:13

121:6,21 122:23

123:25 125:17

131:22 136:11

158:12 179:23

180:6,15 181:2

provided 28:19,20

65:2 66:18 75:11

75:21 78:17 79:11

133:1,8 135:6,15

136:1 156:13

158:7 159:14

providing 154:11

157:20

Public 1:16 192:6

192:24

publish 187:7

pull 66:25

pulmonary 126:13

purported 164:1,11

164:18 165:6,18

166:4,12 170:8

171:4,21 183:8

purportedly 163:18

purporting 82:7

purposes 8:21 68:9

pursuant 106:23

107:11,15

purview 53:23

put 25:2 83:9 90:24

93:16 116:19

127:7 188:6

putting 160:5

P-15 4:15

P.A 3:6

P.C 3:2

p.m 77:4,6,7 97:12

97:15,16 99:22,25

100:2 113:20,22

113:24 125:1,4,6

144:22,24 145:1

186:14,16,17

191:1,5

Q

quantitative 47:5

question 10:22 13:2

13:6,9,20 33:2

41:13 46:11 48:8

48:9,13,22 50:11

51:6 56:21 61:4

62:23 68:21 69:5

71:4 74:21 76:21

76:22 77:11,13,15

78:1,8 79:4,7,9,16

80:11,13 81:7,18

83:1,19 87:12

92:17,22 95:14,20

95:24 96:6,11

97:19,20,22 99:9

100:6 102:17,17

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 210 of 218 PageID:

44129
Page 18

103:20 109:17

112:25 117:12

120:15,17 122:9

125:8,11,13 126:4

128:2,5,12,14,19

129:7 130:2,3,5

134:16,17,18,20

134:22 140:4

141:1,8,17,18

142:2,4,5,6

143:14 144:1,2,4

144:4 145:3,5,10

145:14,15,18,20

145:21,22,24

146:1,5,7,9,17

149:14,18 151:19

151:20,22 152:10

152:15,18,22,23

152:25 153:11,13

153:14,17 154:5

160:3 164:24,25

170:11 173:4

177:5,24 178:1

179:21 180:4,16

180:17,21,22

181:7 182:25,25

183:6,14,18 184:5

184:12,19 185:5

questioning 124:20

141:18 144:17

152:2

questions 6:7 20:15

60:24 86:14 108:7

108:19 119:9

127:5 129:21

143:11 146:3

147:3 154:18

187:8 190:13,14

quick 49:23 144:10

144:15 188:13

quite 128:18

R

R 2:1,22 3:1,10

25:10 105:4 109:5

109:10 110:4,24

111:17 112:11,11

113:5

raised 97:25 99:1

100:6,7 169:17

ran 15:3 23:25

Ransom 18:7

raw 92:18,24

reach 28:14 32:2

36:7,21 170:3

reached 32:8 65:11

174:10

react 33:5

reactive 32:1,2

read 48:7,9 77:12

77:13 79:7 90:21

93:3 97:19,20

119:4 120:15,17

121:11 125:11

128:3,4,5 130:3

134:9,16,17

135:18 139:8

144:2 145:4,5

149:4,5,24 151:20

162:6,8 164:25

177:23,24 182:12

182:14

reading 60:18

125:9 127:20

140:15 149:21

reads 176:15

ready 151:16

162:14 163:19

real 18:11,16

188:13

realization 89:21

89:23

realize 121:11

realized 65:25

140:10

really 11:3 15:3

19:4 23:14 27:9

29:4 30:4,11

34:14 51:25 54:2

64:16 66:4 74:4

75:18 83:10 85:15

104:3 109:19

118:21 127:1

139:7,8 155:11

160:4 170:16

173:21 189:15

realm 54:9

reason 119:14

122:5 132:5,6

reasonably 113:2

reasons 48:4,25

138:12

recall 9:7 11:4,15

13:23 15:13 16:2

16:10 22:2 23:13

27:4,19 29:2

31:16 32:16 33:3

34:2 35:6,13,17

36:24 38:8,15

39:11,20 40:11

41:5 43:11,15,22

44:1 45:4,5,17,23

46:19 48:24 49:13

52:5,8,16 53:22

54:2 58:23 62:1

70:9,19 83:14

92:11 101:13

104:14,17 108:15

116:25 117:6,14

131:12 134:11

135:23 136:10,14

154:21 156:5

160:11,16,21

164:5,6 166:9,17

166:19 167:5,7

168:4,6,8,11,24

169:21 170:22

172:8,13 174:1

184:24 190:8

receive 17:8,11

19:12 28:25 74:7

received 40:7 46:12

70:19 179:8

receiving 31:14

recess 77:6 113:22

144:24 186:16

recollection 14:1

25:19 35:1 64:17

65:19 66:4,8,13

137:6 153:21

154:10 162:17

189:17

record 4:13 7:2

15:25 49:25 50:8

57:20,22,23,25

65:8 66:7 68:8

77:5,8 86:24

88:19 97:13,17

99:18,23 100:3

104:6,11,14,18

113:21,25 125:2,6

144:20,23 145:1

167:10 175:19

176:12 186:15,18

191:2

records 30:12 36:9

44:13,15,19,22

52:11,14,19,25

64:22 65:1,3,18

67:4,6,6,11 68:2

73:8 101:7,22,23

102:2,5,24 105:18

108:7,10 110:15

118:12 119:8

131:23 189:1

recruit 22:19 23:2

Red 2:5

refer 30:2

referral 74:16

referrals 30:1

131:23

referred 98:1,20

referring 76:6

98:17 148:20

162:15,19

reframe 48:13

refresh 35:1 65:19

189:16

regarding 46:12

69:25

regardless 149:2

regards 128:9

regular 105:17

113:11

Reindel 93:22

rejoined 24:16

related 5:6 20:16

28:4 73:9 101:7

107:15 167:11

176:16,19 192:17

relates 135:21

179:6

relating 9:10 30:11

37:16 100:8

108:25 109:1

110:4,25 111:7,9

112:17 126:15

relation 37:15

relationships 54:21

relative 192:15

relatively 42:14

release 4:22 175:21

175:24 176:2,9,14

relevant 36:9 87:25

88:6 113:15

120:20 128:10

reliable 151:13,23

153:1

relieve 88:9

remark 88:18

remember 9:14

11:3,23 12:17,21

16:6,8,11 19:20

20:11,22,23 22:4

22:8 23:14 30:5

30:21 32:19 34:15

34:17 35:18 37:23

39:10,19,21 42:3

42:17 46:8 47:3

47:23 49:8 51:18

51:25 52:7,10

54:6 64:3 65:15

66:10 68:19 70:7

70:8 83:1 98:15

104:3,13,16,20

106:21 107:22

117:5,11 118:9

119:1,3,6 131:4

135:19 147:21

155:5,11 156:7,9

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 211 of 218 PageID:

44130
Page 19

157:22 158:17,22

158:23 159:19,23

159:25 160:4,8

161:12 162:25

163:1,3 170:1,2

170:16,17 171:14

173:24,24 175:25

177:10 188:3,5

189:9,15,24

remembered 34:25

Rendered 5:6

167:12

repeat 62:23 71:6

120:14 128:2

repeating 74:22

repetitive 54:21

rephrase 81:9

102:20 111:25

128:8 141:1,16

142:1 177:6 178:6

178:16 181:9

rephrased 177:6

replacing 38:2

replies 15:20 134:9

reply 115:24

report 19:15 21:21

21:25 26:4 70:13

166:20 168:4,7,9

168:12

reported 21:23

73:15 90:8 162:21

174:22,25

reporter 1:15 5:22

7:13 8:11 48:10

77:14 79:8 97:21

120:17 125:12

128:6 130:4

134:17 144:3

145:6 151:21

164:25 177:25

191:3 192:6

reporting 175:3

reports 28:9,20,21

28:25 29:4 46:12

46:15,19,22 47:2

47:23 48:4 52:16

53:2 54:3 55:13

65:2 70:20

represent 7:16 87:3

representation

154:2

representative

155:15,16 170:20

represented 21:4,8

54:17

representing 11:6

42:6

reputable 40:19

request 6:1 7:11

42:14 88:6 137:10

Requested 10:6

requests 10:9,14

41:22 42:1,7,18

42:20,21 43:7,14

43:18 44:2,9,24

require 79:25

required 24:6

31:12 122:3

155:14

requirement

101:23

research 22:25

92:8,23 110:10

Research-Cottrell

18:19 22:23

resolution 169:18

resolve 172:10

resolved 172:9,14

172:18 176:3

Resources 25:9

respect 61:7

respond 30:14 32:8

36:10,11 43:3

88:7 133:3 137:4

137:9 155:20

responded 115:21

116:20 143:5

Respondent 122:12

122:15

responding 20:15

28:10 135:15

143:3 160:10

response 28:17

33:13 115:5,9

119:2 120:20

121:10 122:1

126:18 128:1,22

129:7 134:2,4

136:2 137:5,21

139:2

responses 5:9 66:11

114:13,21,24

115:11,18 117:3

117:24 118:18

119:14,22 121:3,7

121:18,22 122:25

124:2 125:18

127:4,7 129:14

130:10 134:8

135:7 148:13

163:2

responsibilities

23:16 27:21 28:1

31:7,16 37:13

40:1,2 155:3

responsibility 28:8

39:2

responsible 33:16

52:20 55:22

127:10

responsive 5:19

10:9,14 36:12

44:24 99:12

101:21 125:25

126:23 161:2,14

rest 60:8 147:10

result 63:25

results 90:7 91:12

retain 28:14 35:5

106:12 108:20

109:10 110:4,24

112:11 113:5

retained 111:18

112:24 115:22

162:13 163:25

164:10 165:5,17

retaining 31:4

101:22

retains 5:22 191:3

retention 4:13

15:25 65:8,16

66:7 73:8 101:6

104:4,7,12,15,18

106:19 107:17,24

108:7,17 109:9,16

110:13 111:12

155:12 165:21

187:17,24 188:2

190:5,10

retired 17:15

Retrieval 105:6

returned 84:23

reveal 50:21 77:21

78:10 79:25 154:4

157:19 165:22

166:14 172:16

revealed 95:21

96:12

revealing 47:20

77:20 152:19

165:3 173:11

review 10:10 15:19

40:8,9 41:3,22

42:19 43:20,24

45:7,19 60:8

83:17 116:23

159:12 167:4

reviewed 16:3,12

16:17,20 40:4

65:18 75:12 104:6

104:8,8 107:25

117:24 169:5

reviewing 41:11

43:23 45:24

116:25 138:18

149:7 156:5

Rhode 35:16 91:25

155:9,10

right 11:21,25

12:23 13:5 14:12

19:14 20:3 21:12

22:14 25:13 29:13

33:6 34:1 39:24

49:23 50:4 55:7

55:15 56:23 58:10

59:16 60:25 66:15

67:11 69:2,18

72:18 73:4 77:9

88:24,25,25 89:8

94:16 98:11 106:2

107:21 110:1,23

114:2 124:22

127:13 131:1

132:9,23 133:1,6

136:8,9,21 137:22

138:3 139:13

142:17 146:19

148:3 150:5,12

154:13 170:18

171:8 172:2 176:2

179:15 181:1,11

181:18 186:22

189:2 190:7,20

rock 1:17 2:19 7:10

174:4

rocks 162:3

role 18:16 30:7,15

30:19 31:4,6

36:12,15 37:3

39:4 43:6 53:7

108:1,3 127:16

143:21 155:2,18

159:21

Ronald 2:9 8:2 14:7

ronald.anguas@...

2:11

room 48:19 50:2

76:25 97:15 99:25

125:4

Roth 2:2 7:11

roughly 11:24 12:3

22:9 24:16

routine 42:13

175:10

Rudolph 162:5

Rule 5:17 72:4,9

rules 71:15

running 30:3 98:23

99:20

Russoniello 1:15

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 212 of 218 PageID:

44131
Page 20

7:14 192:5,23

S

S 2:1,22 3:1,2,10,10

4:7 5:1 8:12,12,12

safe 82:23

salary 19:1,8,12

sales 148:22,24

sam 58:5 96:10

sample 90:3 182:5

samples 89:24,25

90:5 96:10 161:22

161:24 162:2

167:17

Save 172:6

saw 10:17 23:8 53:3

65:6,22 66:1

104:10 122:6,18

129:4 130:24

143:1 185:14,22

saying 28:19 60:21

80:10 139:13,21

152:11 156:8

163:7

says 10:6 60:19,23

61:6 63:18 69:13

69:24 73:1,4,20

84:9 85:4,4,9

89:23 91:23 92:3

92:16 93:18

105:14,23 106:4

106:11 115:6

126:10,15,19

137:23 138:5

148:6,19 150:24

156:12 157:2

158:6 159:2

161:21 167:15,24

169:9 172:23

176:2,2 189:4,7

189:10,11

scanning 96:1

schist 167:19

school 17:4,6 18:2

scientists 91:4,7,12

139:25

scope 109:16,18,20

110:13,14,15

112:22

scratch 27:23 135:9

149:6 165:14

171:18 172:3,5

scroll 58:6

second 14:18 15:17

16:17,21 17:6

57:20 58:6 59:13

59:17,18,19 60:18

60:20 63:17 72:12

83:9 84:6 89:19

93:17 106:3

111:22 114:17,17

115:4,12 142:12

152:24 157:2

158:25 159:1,2

161:8 176:8,13

secretary 25:18,20

28:2,3

Section 72:13

see 9:23 24:13 28:8

54:3 59:9,16,25

60:9,15 62:20

69:14,21 72:16,21

73:2,11 81:10

85:8 86:7 87:8

88:25 89:7 90:10

91:23 92:1,5 93:1

93:18,25 95:4

101:9 105:7,20

106:7,8,16 109:4

114:19 115:13

117:21 118:3

123:11 124:8

126:8,16,18,19

138:16 147:10,17

148:16 156:2,15

157:8 158:10

159:6 160:6 161:6

161:9,16 167:14

167:21 168:2,20

169:2,19 173:1

176:4,21 187:20

188:12 189:4,11

seeing 28:10 30:22

52:16 58:23 66:5

68:19 96:22 167:5

167:7

seek 57:1 170:6

seen 9:19 58:19

64:4 68:13 72:6

85:15 86:1,17,18

87:8,13,15 90:22

93:5,10 96:16

105:9 114:21

134:12 147:19

161:10 175:23

184:21 187:17

select 28:16 96:3

selected 96:3

selection 36:7

seminars 53:4

send 42:13 66:25

sent 33:25 90:6

sentence 106:3,11

117:21 140:16

142:6,16 143:7,12

144:5 148:7

156:20 157:2

158:6 159:2

167:15 172:22

173:13,17 176:8

176:13 179:5

184:22

separate 26:19,20

47:13 58:21 90:14

separating 56:16

series 129:20

serpentine 167:18

167:25

served 40:13 43:25

44:3 116:24

140:24,24 143:1

147:24 150:6

166:19

service 4:11 30:23

117:18

services 1:23 5:6

7:13,14 24:6

167:11

serving 20:24

session 14:8,15,19

14:24,24 15:1,7

15:11 113:23

sessions 14:11 15:2

set 5:10 51:15 54:1

114:14,14 115:12

117:25 148:13

settle 29:3 53:8

55:24 56:13 57:5

64:11 174:7,12

185:10

settled 48:5 59:10

60:10 67:5,12

185:19

settlement 4:20

29:3 46:21 48:25

53:11 54:22,25

55:11,19 57:1

59:1 60:4,10,12

61:8,12 62:5,15

63:5,14 64:15

169:14,24 170:3,6

170:15 172:19

174:2,10,18,22

175:12,21 176:19

177:9 178:18

183:10 185:1,25

settlements 30:16

30:19 46:14,15

47:6,24 53:18

64:11 68:3,9,12

174:15 186:1

seven 169:4

seventh 72:19

Seven-page 5:18

severance 19:7,13

severe 64:15

Shafer 159:10

share 86:5 88:2,2

187:6,10

shared 39:15,15

67:12

Sherry 58:7

SherryLynn 58:5

60:21 185:16

shifting 38:6

short 48:18 50:10

55:8 77:1,1 97:11

137:17 186:13

shortly 10:17 97:2

show 9:16 12:20

82:8 104:24 114:4

175:15

showed 76:11 90:3

132:7 140:8

showing 58:2 91:13

186:22

shown 15:12,15

138:19

shut 30:13 151:18

sic 48:22 162:4

167:3

side 22:12 90:25

179:12

sign 127:12

significant 19:25

115:1

signing 160:7

similar 23:18

184:21 187:23

simple 61:17 129:7

single 19:20 87:7

87:17 157:5

sir 13:9 25:1 62:19

156:23

six 9:24 11:24 12:3

13:10 169:3,4

Six-page 4:9

skimmed 58:18

slipped 25:2

Sloane 2:17 8:5

29:9 55:21 69:21

93:22 94:2,3,5

121:17 122:5

130:25 131:9,12

131:20 132:7

small 67:21,21 74:7

162:1,1

smaller 18:9 90:4

snow 12:9

snowstorm 11:22

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 213 of 218 PageID:

44132
Page 21

12:8

snowstorms 12:5

12:12,13

sold 10:24 26:23

27:4 138:2,5,6

solid 174:4

somebody 122:10

142:16 143:9,13

175:7,8

somewhat 87:19

sorry 9:18 25:3

26:14 29:15 33:1

34:7 37:24 43:10

60:20 63:1 79:3

84:7 86:4,9 88:15

91:20 97:9 98:18

117:19 118:22

134:15 139:18,20

144:1 147:7

152:23 156:25

161:7 166:23

171:6 176:11

177:20 180:5

182:21

sort 18:21 29:4

30:3 33:20 46:7

65:11 100:13

108:6 143:23

163:5

sound 29:14

source 45:5,5 135:2

135:3 154:2

157:10,23 160:1

Southern 3:3

speak 29:7 83:8

97:7 119:8 143:24

171:9,10

speaking 16:23

37:19 118:9

special 68:10 175:3

specialist 39:9

specific 20:9,9,17

20:22 22:4 23:19

24:12 29:17 30:4

33:24 41:12 48:3

50:21 52:17,17

61:22 64:7 66:13

74:21 88:6 98:4

100:20 101:16

103:6,15 116:25

119:2 131:17

135:5 154:11

161:9 162:17

163:14 164:5

165:3 170:1

specifically 22:8

28:24 34:14 39:19

40:11 58:23 66:22

67:11 98:15

106:20 156:7

164:6

specifics 63:12,14

65:15 66:10 83:2

83:18 104:4 111:7

111:9 113:10

155:19 158:23

163:2 173:22

speed 75:4

Spitzer 18:9

Spivak 29:14

spoke 54:4 55:2

137:3,8

spoken 16:24

108:11 156:13

Square 2:3,14

stamp 89:1 92:15

stamped 95:10

167:3

stamps 66:21

stand 169:16

standard 5:10

42:14 114:14

117:25 148:13

stands 145:10

start 7:19 29:23

38:20 87:20

137:12 140:13

177:7

started 11:13,18

15:4,8 20:13

21:15 25:16

104:22

starting 23:17

47:19 48:12 60:1

95:12 141:2

state 1:16 7:16

17:19 74:3 115:6

126:15 156:12

192:7,24

statement 71:24

138:23 140:2

142:11 144:8

145:8 149:9,24

150:2 152:3 157:2

157:11

statements 52:15

states 1:1 7:5 17:21

153:8

status 17:15 28:20

28:21,25 29:3

31:9 46:12,14,18

46:22 47:24 48:4

stay 19:11 36:18

stayed 18:25 22:21

65:8,12

steering 43:1

stenographically

192:12

step 124:18

Stoneback 160:6,9

160:14,20

story 43:5

Strauss 147:16

148:21

Street 2:4,9

Streets 2:14

strong 23:3

struggled 162:10

studies 73:7 85:5

85:11 95:15,21

study 96:1,1,6

study-type 85:14

stuff 110:18 139:4

140:8 175:10

182:10,12 188:16

subject 85:2 89:5

93:11 98:3 105:5

submitted 89:25

subsequently 90:5

subset 56:19

subsidiaries 148:11

subsidiary 9:11

138:7

suffering 63:24

suggested 170:17

suggests 140:9

suit 20:19

suite 2:4 26:20

167:17

Sullivan 28:24 29:6

55:4,14,15 58:5

60:21 69:20

185:15

summaries 59:6

summarized

148:12

summary 5:5 28:9

45:14,18,20,24

46:1,8 70:12

167:11 173:4

summer 22:10

Sunday 167:16

supervisor 37:5

supplemental 53:2

supplied 148:9,12

support 24:23

supporting 158:9

158:13

supposed 19:17

112:23 130:19

143:2

sure 7:18 9:15 11:9

11:17 12:5 14:16

18:7 19:4 24:14

26:15 27:6,9

33:10 39:17 42:14

49:22 53:14,15

54:14 56:18 59:14

61:5 62:8,25 63:2

63:12,13 64:4

68:24 70:18 71:7

71:16 74:17,24

77:2 79:5,17,19

80:15 83:18,24

84:23 85:1 91:11

99:14,17,21

100:24 102:22

103:19 105:13

112:8 114:7 115:2

117:13 120:16

123:9 127:17

128:18 131:6,20

132:1 139:19

142:25 152:18

155:21 156:10

160:17 169:16

171:6 172:11

173:12

surmise 64:14

120:1 137:17

surprise 107:5

surprised 40:16

surprising 40:21

surrounding

176:20

swear 8:11

switch 27:13

154:14

sworn 8:13 192:9

system 23:18 54:1

systems 21:4,5

system's 30:3

T

T 3:10 4:7 5:1 8:12

8:12 148:22

Tab 88:23 89:4

tabs 88:24

tailings 167:19

182:4,18

take 14:12 17:25

19:21 20:17 49:23

52:3 59:11 72:12

73:19 77:1 86:10

100:23 104:24

114:9 144:10,15

154:14 186:13

taken 7:9 8:23 9:4

9:13 45:8,10 77:6

84:16 95:2 113:22

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 214 of 218 PageID:

44133
Page 22

144:24 186:16

192:12

talc 5:13 10:24

15:24,24 27:12,18

27:20,25 28:6,12

29:8,10,12 30:7

30:11 34:4,9,12

34:15,25 35:2,5,9

35:17,20,24 36:25

37:6,8,15,16,21

38:9,17 39:3,13

39:18 40:3,23

41:1 42:1,24 43:8

43:11,14,15,19,22

43:25 44:11,12

45:1,3,4,8,11,15

45:18,21 46:7,13

49:1 51:11,21

52:12,17 53:5,8

56:14,17,25 61:9

61:10,13,15,19

62:2,6,15 63:5

64:1,23 65:4

67:25 68:5,11,11

68:13,20 70:1,4

70:10,23 71:9,17

73:8,9,24 74:6

76:2,3,11,18

77:17 78:5,19

79:14,22 80:19,23

81:5,22 82:3,8,17

82:18,23 83:5,12

83:13 85:6,18,23

89:5 90:15 91:4,7

91:13 92:18,18,24

95:16,21 96:18

100:14,17 101:8

102:6,24 103:6

109:22,23 110:10

110:21,22 113:4

134:14,24 135:1,1

135:21 136:6,7,13

137:2,5,10 138:2

138:5,7,9,14,21

139:23 142:8

144:7 148:9,23

149:1 150:25

153:8 155:24

157:3,4,6,11

161:22,24 162:2

166:12 167:16,18

167:25 169:11

172:24 173:5

174:7,8,13 184:23

185:10

talc-carbonate

167:18

talc-related 29:1

talc-specific 102:4

talk 34:7 36:7 43:7

43:13 46:5,7 47:9

47:14,15 49:20

124:16

talked 70:12 74:13

74:25 154:20

165:13

talking 32:19 43:12

43:16 46:17 59:6

73:24 85:13

123:15 136:4,5,6

136:13 160:17

182:19 188:18

talks 105:22

tall 26:24

tape's 99:20

tasked 117:6

Tech 90:1 96:4,7,8

96:12,18

technical 129:6

technically 55:22

Technology 90:9

Tel 2:6,6,10,15,20

3:4,8

telephone 3:2,6

115:7

tell 36:23 70:12

78:16 79:10

149:23 159:13

172:2 177:15

178:4,10 179:4,18

telling 114:9

180:12

tend 150:23

term 75:16

terminated 19:10

terms 174:1 179:4

181:5,12

territories 33:18

territory 33:24

test 91:12

tested 92:18 96:17

testified 78:6 91:7

91:12 92:17 93:6

95:15,20,24 96:11

126:11 127:6

140:1

testifies 8:13 96:17

testimony 93:5,10

96:16 192:12

testing 4:15 85:10

85:22 87:1,4 91:7

tests 73:6,7 76:10

84:9,11,16 85:5

86:2

Thank 25:6 67:3

68:23 69:1 72:1

91:2 97:19 114:6

160:23 168:15

189:1 190:20,22

thanks 22:24 79:6

101:4 166:25

186:13

then-current 43:16

theory 19:16 53:24

thereof 118:1

Theresa 5:18 161:2

thick 87:10

thing 29:4 30:4

41:19 42:13 65:12

66:3 70:11,13,15

74:13 83:13 87:18

101:20 104:9

106:9 115:2

143:23 164:22

things 19:24 65:22

74:11 139:8

think 11:12 12:17

14:8,22 15:5,8,8

15:16,16 18:22

19:13 21:3,8,11

21:12 22:5,8

23:20 25:16 26:1

28:9 29:13,22,23

30:23 31:25 33:6

33:12 38:24 39:15

39:24 42:12 44:6

46:25 47:8,10,19

48:11 50:15,22

54:4 55:20 56:1,5

57:15,18 62:17

63:9 64:17,20

67:2 70:5,16,17

71:14 73:25 74:11

80:2,20,24 81:6

85:9 98:22 101:20

102:11,18 108:5

109:15 111:23

112:15 118:15

123:14 124:8

128:7,8,14 131:21

133:21 134:20

135:22 136:18

140:19 141:2,15

144:14 145:9

146:9,18 147:5

151:3 162:7

165:24 172:15

173:6,9,10 177:3

177:5 178:16,17

178:20 179:23

180:14 181:24

182:6 183:12

184:13 188:21

190:18

third 59:8 87:16

117:21 148:7,18

176:14

Thomas 3:9,11

7:12 8:9 93:23

94:8,11

thought 23:9

118:13

thousand 39:23

59:11 60:10,11,16

185:20

three 90:14 105:19

140:12 147:23

three-ring 75:18

threshold 151:2

Tia 14:10

ties 100:12

Tim 7:23 14:7

66:16 91:19

time 7:8 9:12,22

11:2 12:2,2 14:13

17:18 18:14 20:8

22:7,10 23:22

24:2 25:14 26:3,5

26:11,18 27:11

29:9,12 33:22

37:14,22 38:12

39:23 49:24 50:1

50:5 57:21,24

61:23 64:18 73:19

77:4,7 79:4 83:23

90:12 94:14 96:10

96:21,25 97:12,14

97:16 99:22,24

100:2,15 101:24

108:12 113:13,20

113:24 125:1,3,5

139:1,2 141:14

144:1,22,25

146:21 147:2

154:23 163:8

171:14,15 174:11

179:1 180:7

182:20 186:14,17

191:1 192:13

times 18:6 21:3,9

23:22 55:21 57:16

67:23 185:25

186:7

time-wise 170:22

TIMOTHY 2:18

Tim's 14:9

tire 28:7,22 29:2

30:16,17,19,22

32:18 33:12,14

36:3 46:14,15

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 215 of 218 PageID:

44134
Page 23

47:25 53:13,14,20

53:22 54:6,8,9

55:12 56:10,17

57:1,4 59:2 64:25

67:6,25 73:25

74:2,3 83:9,20,25

84:3 174:8,13

185:17

title 21:14 25:15,23

25:25 92:10

titled 167:11

today 7:7 8:20 9:13

9:20 10:14 34:21

64:4 72:7 90:12

93:6,13 96:17,21

114:22 129:3

138:19 139:5,12

140:9 147:20

185:3,14

today's 14:4,24

16:25 162:11

187:21

told 11:25 78:8

98:25 143:20

181:19 183:7

Tom 37:6

Tony 32:24 35:4,6

68:25 86:7 130:14

132:13,13 147:1

147:11 160:24

175:18

Tony's 35:6 151:16

top 73:2 89:7 92:1

153:25

topic 30:1 47:22

topics 29:22 46:22

47:13,18 49:19

Tortorella 3:2 8:7

total 60:5

totally 188:22

touch 22:21 36:10

116:20

traces 90:3

trading 23:25

24:12 38:4

transcript 4:16,18

95:10 172:7

192:11

transcripts 45:7

122:20 127:25

129:11,13 130:7,9

130:18

transferred 39:7

transmission 96:2

transmit 15:24

31:11 41:7,14

transmittal 83:15

transmitted 41:4

transmitting 31:15

Treasury 25:9

trees 12:11

trial 126:11

tried 111:13 170:2

Triglia 89:4,13

true 56:9 67:15

71:19 83:24,24

118:1 119:2

138:22 139:3,10

140:2 149:9

177:16 178:4,14

180:13 186:4

192:11

try 74:17 112:8,25

140:25 141:1

155:19

trying 15:16 36:18

47:13 59:14 81:16

82:25 99:15

142:20,20

Tuesday 1:11 7:7

Tunis 3:6 8:8,8

50:6 190:16

turn 10:4,4 59:16

63:16 72:18 93:17

96:9 101:2 115:4

117:15 126:5

137:19 156:11

157:1 161:13

169:8 172:20

176:1 188:8

Turner 60:6

turning 109:4

141:16

two 2:3,14 16:7

18:3,8 21:12,24

39:22 52:3 58:4

58:21 65:21 86:5

86:9 90:6 108:19

114:19 127:7

132:17 146:25

166:24 182:17,17

Two-page 4:24

5:15

type 41:19 70:9

141:8

types 43:4 102:5

110:2 148:21

typical 51:24 52:2

typo 162:7

U

ultimately 127:10

172:18

undergraduate

17:4,5

understand 8:20

54:7 70:23 71:9

71:18 79:15 94:2

95:14,25 103:20

106:11 109:21,25

142:21,24 145:14

145:17,20 149:14

151:5 152:1

170:10 180:9

understanding

30:6 54:23,24

55:8,10 60:15

68:7 76:9 82:21

99:1,3 100:7,10

103:11 109:18

134:25 136:17

137:1 143:4,8

149:15,21 150:12

180:2,7 189:14

understands 146:6

understood 30:10

71:14 75:8,14

78:11 102:1 185:5

undue 105:15

unfamiliar 65:22

unfortunately 12:6

unit 20:17,21 24:9

24:12,20,24 25:12

108:21 109:3

United 1:1 7:5

units 24:1,10 109:6

updated 47:24

updates 188:3

use 58:13,14 76:25

110:10

usually 28:15

utilizing 95:17 96:1

V

vague 66:8

vaguely 47:23

Vale 2:13 8:4,4

69:1 72:1,11

114:6 147:3,5,7

151:18 154:19

168:15 190:14

valea@pepperla...

2:16

validity 182:4

value 119:21

Van 162:5

varied 61:23

various 73:5,22

148:8 158:7

Verification 117:19

127:12

verified 116:24

147:24

verifies 117:22

verifying 160:7

Vermont 73:7

84:10,12 95:16

96:18 138:9 157:5

167:17

version 94:20,20

versions 188:2

versus 7:4 11:1

56:17 72:5 112:23

167:13

vice-president 92:8

Video 4:9

Videographer 3:11

7:1,12 8:10 25:1,6

49:24 50:5,7

57:21,24 62:18

77:4,7 97:12,16

99:22 100:2

113:20,24 125:1,5

144:22,25 156:23

186:14,17 190:24

videotape 7:2 10:2

view 51:1

violation 119:12

181:20 183:9

visit 84:14

vs 1:5

W

wait 56:2 81:18

86:11 114:8

127:11 135:9

182:23,23

want 10:4 20:4 33:7

42:10 47:9,12

48:17,19 55:6

63:15 69:11 70:18

72:18 73:18 74:19

76:25 83:9 86:16

87:19 88:12,22

114:4 117:15

123:20 127:15

131:6 140:25

141:1 143:6

147:11 154:14

161:13 176:6,7

180:1,5,20 183:5

183:15 189:16

wanted 19:16 20:15

40:20 46:11 83:17

Warren 3:7

Washington 2:10

16:8

wasn't 23:1 28:4

29:4 33:23 36:16

36:16 40:16 44:17

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 216 of 218 PageID:

44135
Page 24

74:9 75:17 83:10

104:21 116:17

172:1 182:3

way 48:13 51:7

63:10 80:13 81:9

81:19 87:16

102:17,20 104:8

111:24 112:9

113:1 120:19

123:9 128:8 141:2

142:1 149:5

152:17 153:16

177:7 178:16

181:8

week 14:21,23

weeks 147:23 169:3

169:4

Weintraub 115:22

132:10,20 133:2

154:8

went 9:5 15:4 17:5

17:6 18:22,25

30:24 38:1,7

122:20 188:15

weren't 13:21

19:24 36:4

West 1:10 2:19

7:10

Westfall 91:25 95:3

96:22 97:1,6,24

98:1,6,10,20

100:8,12 122:19

123:22 125:14

126:23 127:22

129:11 130:7

138:19 149:8

167:13 185:2

we'll 56:20 67:2,2,2

73:19 84:6 87:20

90:25

we're 8:20 46:17

47:19 49:25 50:7

57:25 77:5,8

97:17 107:21

113:25 136:4,13

183:2 190:18

191:1

we've 74:4,23 85:13

141:12,13,14

whatnot 59:15

Where'd 62:20

Whitman 18:7

Whittaker 167:13

whoa 182:15,15,15

William 60:5

161:22

Williams 1:3 7:4

11:1 72:5

willing 169:13,24

182:8

withdraw 182:24

182:25

withdrawn 106:5

withhold 122:3

witness 4:2 7:24

8:11 13:1,17,19

25:3,5 43:10

47:10,14 48:23

49:21 50:1,22

52:23 55:7 56:3,7

58:8,10 62:20

76:24 79:3,17

81:16 86:6,10,13

86:18 88:18 89:8

91:2 94:22 97:8

97:14 99:24 100:1

101:4 103:3 114:8

118:22 123:20

124:19 125:3

129:19,19,21

139:18 142:22

143:12,23 153:3

156:25 158:3

166:6 177:20,22

183:2 187:10

188:24 189:2

190:13 192:8

witnesses 72:14

Wood 27:1

word 82:25 113:1

words 149:21

150:13 153:2

work 19:16 23:9

27:17 33:23 39:18

40:21 102:11

111:25 112:4

115:23 116:8,16

118:18 123:16

124:9,12 140:21

140:22 141:24

144:20 160:9

173:7 177:3

180:25 182:1

worked 16:5 18:3,9

24:11 27:12 35:2

36:25 38:9 39:12

40:20 58:11 94:13

94:13 95:7 133:17

143:19 154:24

178:25

worker 46:14,15

53:13,22 54:6,8,9

55:12 56:10,17

57:1,4 59:2 64:25

65:4 67:6,8,25

74:3,6 82:3 83:12

83:20,25 84:4

136:6 174:8,13

185:17

workers 28:7,22

29:3 30:16,17,20

30:22 32:18 33:12

33:14 36:3 47:25

53:15,20 73:25

74:2 83:9

working 20:7 22:23

24:8 35:18 37:21

38:3,16,17 106:18

111:14 113:12

117:23 130:13

wouldn't 29:16,16

80:13 133:23

149:14

Wow 11:17 24:14

write 142:25

150:11

written 59:8 141:11

wrong 188:15

wrote 143:13

www.MagnaLS.c...

1:24

X

X 4:1,7 5:1

XI00517 192:25

x-ray 95:17

Y

yeah 12:3,12 15:3

34:22 35:3 39:5

46:18 48:11 58:15

59:21 60:15 61:17

69:16 75:16 76:5

79:1 81:16 86:13

89:3,3,10 92:6

99:19 103:19

104:2,8 107:20

113:10 122:14

132:13 134:21

138:1 139:16

143:18 144:15

147:4 153:3

159:19 160:16

162:25 164:14

173:21 177:2

179:22 184:7

187:9 188:14,24

188:25

year 22:5 24:15

74:9

years 11:2,24 13:11

18:3,8 33:23

34:19 74:8 108:13

135:20 136:16,16

140:10

yesterday 14:25

15:3,14 16:12

65:6,19 114:25

115:2

York 17:15,17,22

18:4,9

Yup 25:3,3 87:14

90:11 92:2 94:23

101:10 156:3

176:5 187:3 189:6

$

$400,000 174:13

176:3 177:15

178:3,9 182:13

0

0 24:17,18

00157 5:8

01 24:18,19 27:16

27:16 38:21,21

02 24:14,16,17

69:17

07052 2:19

07059-6747 3:7

07701 2:5

07928 3:3

1

1 4:14 6:9,12,13 7:2

9:17 15:9 63:18

86:25 97:16 115:5

1,000 186:7

1:03 99:22,25

1:04 100:2

1:23 113:20,22

10 4:24 15:8

10th 161:4

10:11 1:18 7:8

10:30 15:4

10:45 15:4

105 5:8

11 5:3

11-cv-1754 1:2

11:21 49:24 50:2

11:28 50:7

11:41 57:21

11:44 57:24

114 5:9

12/23/91 4:12

12:13 77:4,6

12:24 77:7

12:54 97:12,15

1210 69:14

12168 4:22

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 217 of 218 PageID:

44136
Page 25

12171 4:23

12190-12204 5:14

124 5:15 147:15

148:6

127 2:5 6:13

13 6:9,9,13

13157 89:1

14 5:5 167:2

14202 5:11

14256 5:11

14462 4:17

14484 92:15

146 6:13

14601 4:17

147 5:15

15 5:8 105:3 107:18

109:4 161:15

152 6:14

155 5:12

16 135:20 140:10

16th 15:12 92:4

114:16

161 5:18

167 5:5

168 4:24

17 6:3 135:20

140:10

175 4:22

18 188:20 189:1,1

18th 2:14

184 6:14

186 4:12

19 6:14 188:8,22

19103 2:4

19103-2799 2:15

1967 138:10 157:5

1977 17:10 18:2

90:2

1978 95:17

1979 89:5

1980s 93:14 106:19

1981 18:13 20:6,7

21:13,19

1982 167:16

1983 92:4 95:2

138:11 157:6

161:21

1984 17:13 18:18

21:13,19 22:2,7

105:5

1985 148:23

1988 18:22 22:13

23:11,13,17 25:13

26:2,19 27:7

37:20

1991 187:16,25

2

2 6:11 27:16 161:14

172:23 179:6

184:22

2nd 168:18 169:3

2:03 113:24

2:18 125:1,4

2:34 125:5

20 6:10 58:4

20-minute 88:13

20005 2:10

2001 2:4 24:20

25:14,24 27:14,17

27:24 38:14 39:23

2002 58:4 114:16

147:16,23 156:1

2004 161:4 163:1

168:18 169:3

2006 19:1,3 20:1

24:20 25:24 26:3

27:24 38:14

175:20

2006-2007 39:4

2007 19:2 20:2

2011 12:1

2018 1:11 7:7

202 2:10

203 5:16 72:3 84:7

101:2

205 5:18 161:1

169:6

21 6:10,11 95:10

215 2:6,15,15

2166 167:3

21666-21681 5:7

21681 167:3

22nd 89:5 156:1

24 1:11 146:24

24th 7:7

25 3:7

26 72:4,9 95:2

26(a)(1) 5:17

29 88:23 89:4

2900 2:4

3

3 4:16 15:5 91:17

91:22 126:21

127:21 129:10

130:6,24 131:7

144:22 156:11

179:6 184:23

185:3 189:7

3rd 147:16,22

3/16/83 4:17

3/7/84 5:8

3:00 144:24

3:04 144:25

300 59:10

3000 2:14

309 60:5

310,000 60:5

334310 161:5

334310-334316

5:20

334316 161:5

35 126:5,7

36 137:20

37 137:19,22,25

390446-390460

4:21

39045 59:17

39958-39998 4:13

4

4 4:18 6:9 10:5

94:18 95:1 126:22

127:21 129:10

130:6 185:3

4/12 69:17

4/12/2002 69:14

4/20/2020 192:24

4/26/83 4:19

4:10 186:14,16

4:33 186:17

4:38 191:1,5

400 177:18 185:25

186:6

400,000 174:4

179:14,17 186:6

40099-40100 5:15

40190 148:22

42 89:25 148:23,23

437 3:3

447 63:18

454 63:20

47 6:10

5

5 4:20 69:11 90:4

167:23

5-9 59:22

5/3/02 5:15

5/9/06 4:22

50 6:10 104:9

50-page 104:9

500 148:23

51 6:11

567-9003 2:6

57 5:9 114:5,12

119:23 147:25

58 4:20

6

60 5:12 155:23

622 1:17 2:19 7:9

63 126:8,18 128:1

128:23 129:14

130:11 133:10

647-1022 3:8

647-7721 3:8

65 137:21

655 2:9

66 6:3

69 5:3

7

7 4:22 5:22 105:5

175:16,19 191:4

7th 167:15

72 5:16

732 2:6

736-1712 2:20

736-8660 2:20

747-9003 2:6

77 6:11

8

8 4:3 6:12,14 63:18

8/2/04 4:24

8/20/02 4:20

80 6:12,12

80s 27:8

80-page 140:12

81 20:25

824-8425 3:4

824-9300 3:4

84 18:14 20:25

21:22 22:9 85:1

113:11

86 4:14

866-624-6221 1:24

879-5152 2:10

88 23:12 24:13,14

84:24

9

9 4:9 95:12

9th 175:19

90s 9:2 27:8

908 3:8,8

91 4:16 188:4

94 4:18

9712-9792 4:19

973 2:20,20 3:4,4

9732 95:10

981-4000 2:15

981-4750 2:15

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 600-15 Filed 06/25/18 Page 218 of 218 PageID:

44137