You don't need the product names or old records. No fee unless we recover compensation for your family.
A one-page Johns-Manville internal memo of February 19, 1982, from Bill Clayton at headquarters to Tom Bodnarchuk at the Manville, New Jersey, plant about the file of Samuel Rubbico. Clayton writes that a medical report by Dr. Tucker dated June 12, 1981, "does not suit our purposes": it would have been "far preferable" for Tucker to address only pulmonary findings and "avoid any dissertation related to cancer of the colon," and he suggests that "Steve can persuade Dr. Tucker to rewrite his report and eliminate all references to the colon cancer." Bodnarchuk's handwritten reply says he telephoned Tucker, who would call Clayton, and "I'm sure he will cooperate with your suggestion."
- Author
- Bill Clayton; Tom Bodnarchuk
- Sent to
- Tom Bodnarchuk
- Published by
- Johns-Manville
- Date
- February 19, 1982
- Number
- Bates 00000031
- Library no.
- ACL Doc 11128 · asbestosclaims.law/library/11128
- Rights
- Republished under fair use for research and historical study.
Read or download
Read online Download the PDF Memo with handwritten reply, February 19, 1982 · 1 pages · 47 KB
What it shows
The memo shows J-M staff asking that a doctor's report be rewritten to take out his findings on colon cancer, on the stated ground that they did not "suit our purposes," and the plant contact expecting the doctor to go along. A Bill Clayton had handled workers' compensation at the Waukegan plant from 1951 before moving to J-M's world headquarters (see K. G. Gulley's memo on compensation files), probably the same man; the memo itself does not say whether Rubbico's matter was a lawsuit or a compensation claim.
In Johns-Manville's chronology
Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:
Memorandum to Tom Bodnarchuk from Bill Clayton, 2/19/82 re Samuel Rubbico; informs Bodnarchuk that the medical report prepared by Dr. Tucker did not suit Manville's purposes. Clayton states that it would be preferable to have Dr. Tucker simply address himself to pulmonary findings and avoid any dissertation related to cancer of the colon. Clayton suggests that Dr. Tucker should be persuaded to rewrite his report and eliminate all references to colon cancer. Bodnarchuk replied in a handwritten note that he is sure Dr. Tucker would cooperate with Clayton's suggestion.
Cited on this site
Cite this document
“Bill Clayton to Tom Bodnarchuk on Having Dr. Tucker Rewrite His Report on Samuel Rubbico.” February 19, 1982. Bates 00000031. Johns-Manville. AsbestosClaims.Law Library, ACL Doc 11128. https://asbestosclaims.law/library/11128.
ACL Doc numbers and their short links never change. See how to cite the Library.
Talk with an asbestos lawyer
Start with what you remember, and we'll take it from there.
This page is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every asbestos case turns on its own facts, exposure history, diagnosis, deadlines, available evidence, and applicable law. Reviewing this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, call 833-4-ASBESTOS for a free case review.