Steven A. Weiner to James K. Green on Keeping Tom Williams Out of Interrogatory Answers in Colburn and Young v. Johns-Manville (1982)

A one-page letter of February 1, 1982, from Steven A. Weiner of the Newark, New Jersey, law firm Budd, Larner, Kent, Gross, Picillo & Rosenbaum to James K. Green, an attorney at Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, on Colburn v. Johns-Manville and Young v. Johns-Manville. Green had sent a summary of a December 1981 interview with Tom Williams. Weiner asks whether J-M wants to name Williams in its interrogatory answers "as a person having relevant knowledge of sales to the appropriate refineries," warning that if it does, the plaintiffs and co-defendants will want to depose him; until told otherwise, he writes, "I will keep Mr. Williams 'under raps'."

What it shows

A handwritten note at the foot, dated February 8, 1982, records the answer: "Told Steve not to reveal Wms. name." Interrogatory answers are sworn responses that must list people with relevant knowledge; the letter shows J-M choosing to leave out a man who knew about its sales to refineries so that he would not be deposed.

About this copy

The initials on the handwritten note are unclear (possibly "KG" or "JG"). If they are "JG," the note may be James K. Green's own record of his answer, but that is a guess.

In Johns-Manville's chronology

Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:

In a letter to James K. Green from Steven A. Weiner of Budd, Larner, Kent, Gross, Picillo & Rosenbaum dated 2/1/82, re: Colburn v. Johns-Manville and Young v. Johns-Manville, Weiner requests information as to whether Manville wishes to name Tom Williams in appropriate answers to interrogatories as a person having relevant knowledge of sales to refineries. Weiner points out that if we do name Williams, then Manville should expect that plaintiff and co-defendants will request to take his deposition. Unless instructed to do otherwise, Mr. Williams was to be kept "under raps (sic)."