§ 49 In general
Plainti’s discovery tactics will depend on several factors.
First, discovery should be conducted with a view to eliminating
or adding defendants as more facts are disclosed. Second,
plainti’s attorney should try to gauge the defendants’ knowl-
edge of the dangerous propensities of the chemical implicated
in the client’s injury. Finally, the discovery should attempt to
gain an understanding of defense counsel’s case through depo-
sition of adverse witnesses.80
§ 50 In general
Plainti’s attorney should take only a few depositions.81
Except for expert depositions, the plainti should take most of
the depositions with an eye towards establishing liability.
Plainti’s attorney should take the depositions of the foremen
for both the general contractor or site manager and the paint-
ing contractor. At these depositions plainti’s attorney should
try to show control over the work or worksite by the site
manager. Counsel should also consider deposing an ocial or
engineer of the chemical manufacturer.82
§ 51 Deposition Checklist—Chemical Manufacturer
Set forth below is a checklist of areas of inquiry by way of a
deposition of an ocial of the chemical manufacturer.83 The de-
position should do three things: (1) discover information about
the chemical or chemicals in the industrial solvent that was
involved in the case, (2) seek out information regarding the
chemical company’s knowledge of the hazardous and toxic
80Goldsmith, ‘‘Pleadings and Discovery’’ in G. Nothstein, ed., Toxic Torts:
Litigation of Hazardous Substance Cases §§ 15.01–15.23 (Shephard’s/
McGraw Hill 1984).
81Discovery-Oral Depositions, 4 Am. Jur. Trials 119.
82Use of Engineers as Experts, 6 Am. Jur. Trials 555.
83For model forms interrogatories propounded by plainti against the
painting contractor and the chemical manufacturer, see §§ 56–75.
Mishandling Toxic Substances
@MAGNETO/NEPTUNE/AUTOMATE01/VJUR/AJT/V37P115 SESS: 1 COMP: 07/25/02
PG. POS: 99
nature of the solvent’s active ingred