Martin Letter

The Martin Letter is a 1949 internal Johns-Manville correspondence that, along with other documents in the Sumner Simpson Papers, revealed that asbestos manufacturers knew about the health hazards of asbestos decades before warning workers or the public. It has been used in litigation as evidence of corporate knowledge and concealment, supporting claims for punitive damages.

Origin

The letter takes its name from the discovery and use of mid-twentieth-century industry correspondence, most famously surfaced by attorney Karl Asch and later plaintiffs' counsel in the 1970s, that documented asbestos producers privately discussing disease in their workforces. These letters became central exhibits beginning with cases like Borel v. Fibreboard (1973) and subsequent litigation against Johns-Manville and Raybestos-Manhattan.

Significance in Asbestos Context

For patients and families, documents like the Martin Letter are part of the historical record that proves asbestos companies knew their products caused disease long before they warned workers, consumers, or the public. This kind of evidence is what allows juries to award punitive damages, money awarded specifically because a company's conduct was reckless or fraudulent, not just negligent. If you or a loved one worked with asbestos products from Johns-Manville, Raybestos-Manhattan, or related manufacturers, your legal team will likely reference this body of internal correspondence to establish that the company had knowledge of harm and chose silence. Knowing these documents exist can also help families understand that their diagnosis is not the result of an "unknown" hazard. It is the result of decisions made in corporate offices decades ago.

Example Sentence

During discovery, the plaintiff's attorneys introduced the Martin Letter alongside the Sumner Simpson Papers to show that Johns-Manville executives were discussing asbestos-related lung disease in their workforce as early as the 1930s and 1940s.

Related Terms

Sumner Simpson Papers, Johns-Manville, Punitive Damages, State of the Art Defense, Corporate Knowledge, Raybestos-Manhattan

Notes

• If your work history includes Johns-Manville, Raybestos-Manhattan, or any company that corresponded with them, tell your attorney. Internal correspondence from these companies is often admissible to show corporate knowledge.
• Preserve any old employment records, union materials, pay stubs, or product packaging photos; these help connect you to specific manufacturers whose internal documents are already in evidence.
• Ask your legal team whether punitive damages are being pursued in your case, because documents like the Martin Letter are central to that claim.
• Family members should know that these documents are part of the public record in many trial transcripts and can help them understand the corporate history behind the diagnosis.