You don't need the product names or old records. No fee unless we recover compensation for your family.
Union Carbide's written objections and responses in Patricia Ann McDonald v. GAF Corporation, et al. (Dallas County, Texas), answering the plaintiff's second set of interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission about asbestos in Bakelite, UDEL Polysulfone, polyethylene and polystyrene made at Bound Brook, NJ and Marietta, OH. Union Carbide admitted that some phenolic molding compound formulations contained asbestos filler until 1974 and denied or objected to the other requests. The last pages are an excerpt from a Bakelite Corporation booklet that mentions asbestos used as a filler in heat-resistant plastics.
- Author
- Gary D. Elliston (Attorney for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P.); Paul E. Hamilton (Attorney for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P.)
- Published by
- DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P., for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation
- Series
- Union Carbide documents, UC-2053
- Date
- July 27, 2001
- Library no.
- ACL Doc 17078 · asbestosclaims.law/library/17078
- Rights
- A document from asbestos litigation, published for research and historical study.
Read or download
Read online Download the PDF Document UC-2053 · 52 pages · 2.2 MB
What the document holds
- Pages 1-2: Caption, signature block of Union Carbide's counsel, and certificate of service dated July 27, 2001
- Pages 3-6: General objections and objections to definitions and instructions, including the description of Union Carbide's asbestos-containing products
- Pages 7-40: Responses to Requests for Admission Nos. 1-15, Requests for Production and Interrogatories Nos. 1-4 on asbestos in Bakelite, UDEL Polysulfone, polyethylene and polystyrene
- Pages 41-47: Not provided for review
- Pages 48-52: Excerpt from a Bakelite Corporation booklet on plastics, mentioning asbestos fillers; back page lists Bakelite offices and plants
People and organizations
From Gary D. Elliston (Attorney for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P.); Paul E. Hamilton (Attorney for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P.) to Stephen Johnston (Attorney for Plaintiff Patricia Ann McDonald, Baron & Budd, Dallas).
- Gary D. Elliston (author)
- Paul E. Hamilton (author)
- Union Carbide Corporation (its organization)
- Baron & Budd (named)
- County Court at Law No. 5 (named)
- DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P (named)
- GAF Corporation (named)
Related pages
Pages on our site about what this document covers: Asbestos-Reinforced Plastics: Circuit Breakers, Switchgear, and Resin Pipe · New Jersey Asbestos Exposure Sites: Worksites, Industries, and Trust Coverage · Ohio Asbestos Exposure Sites: Worksites, Industries, and Trust Coverage.
About this copy
This is document UC-2053 of the Union Carbide documents, documents produced and used as evidence in asbestos lawsuits against Union Carbide, 52 pages.
Cite this document
Gary D. Elliston (Attorney for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P.), Paul E. Hamilton (Attorney for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation, DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P.). “Union Carbide's Objections and Answers to Plaintiff's Second Set of Interrogatories, Requests for Production and Requests for Admission, McDonald v. GAF Corporation.” July 27, 2001. Union Carbide documents, UC-2053. DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P., for Defendant Union Carbide Corporation. AsbestosClaims.Law Library, ACL Doc 17078. https://asbestosclaims.law/library/17078.
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.