Carbonless Copy Paper Injury and Information Network



Litigation Page

Hayden vs Appleton Papers Inc. 
Pre-Trial Memorandum submitted by Plaintiff's attorney
Martin K. Brigham
Download PDF
Moore Business Forms Inc. to Norman Gleichman, Esq.
Mr. Gleichman was the CWA, Communication Workers
of America, District 2 Counsel
** note this does not advise formaldehyde was in their
ccp.  Nor if Moore purchased ccp from another ccp
manufacturer and just printed the forms.  Does not list
what desensitizing inks were used or any PFOS or
Download PDF

These documents are Public Record.  They are the Judge's
decision and Appleton Papers Inc.'s submissions.  The
complete list of Appleton Papers Inc.'s internal documents
was submitted by another individual to the CA Courts and
CA AG's office.  So are now public record.*
* We suggest these documents could be of great
assistance to Plaintiff's counsel in carbonless litigation.
**We have a copy of the complete list.

Montgomery County Clerk of Courts PRO System


vs. Appleton Papers Inc                                            2005 CV 03133
** Appleton Papers Inc.'s West Carrollton, OH carbonless
manufacturing plant, their Recycling Mill, and Waste Treatment
Plant are built on top of the Great Miami/Little Miami River Basins
Buried Valley Aquifer.  Appleton's own Waste Treatment Plant
discharges into the Miami River that feeds into the Ohio River.  
Case transferred to
United States District Court Southern District
of Ohio  Civil Case number                                           3:05-CV-160.
"Settlement Negotiated"
DIANE SCHRAMM                                                     CA 020594
vs. Appleton Papers Inc.                                           CA 020940
                                                                                        03 CV 3239
Diane Schramm                                                    04-867884-SI
vs. Appleton Papers
Diane L. Schramm, Mark Schramm
Stuart Bessette                                                   2005 CV 03685
vs. Appleton Papers
Personal Injury
This case was transferred  to
United States District Court Southern
District Of Ohio and filed on 05-24-05
and given Civil case number                                    3:05-CV-181

Christopher Hill et al.                                            1997 CV 05540
vs. Appleton Papers                                             1995 CV 02220
Personal Injury
Ruie Morris                                                             1992 CV 03128
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al.
Robert Roberts                                                      2002 CV 06482
vs. Appleton Papers      Personal Injury
Danny Henschen                                                  2004 CV 05510
vs. Appleton Papers Inc                                      2003 CV 03327
workers Comp cases
Larry M. Tays                                                         2004 CV 05434
vs. Appleton Papers Inc &
Bureau of workers Compensation
Louie K, Lainhart                                                 2004 CV 01975
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al
Sharon Napier                                                      2003 CV 07441
vs. Appleton Papers Inc. et al.  (WC case)
Michael W. Curtner                                             1997 CV 05494
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al.
Michael W. Curtner                                             2000 CV 00355
vs. Appleton papers Inc et al
Wanda Miller                                                        1998 CV 00127
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al
Wanda Miller                                                        1996 CV 01393
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al                        
Thomas Wilson Sr.                                             1997 CV 05228
vs Appleton Papers Inc et al
Thomas Wilson Sr.                                             1995 CV 01200
vs Appleton Papers Inc et all
Jack Johnson                                                     1996 CV 02098
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al
Rufus Miler                                                           1996 CV 01761
Appleton Papers Inc et al
Jeannie Doran                                                     1993 CV 04474
vs Appleton Papers Inc et al
Jeannie Doran                                                     1996 CV 00861
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al
Linda F. Trout                                                       1995 CV 02099
vs Appleton Papers Inc et al
Michael W. Curtner                                              1995 CV 01123
Appleton Papers Inc. et al
John Bozman                                                       1993 CV 03694
vs Appleton Papers
Patricia Gibson                                                     1993 CV 01270
vs. Appleton Papers Inc et al
Fred Walker                                                           1992 CV 02263
vs Appleton Papers
Gladys M. Barber                                                 1990 CV 02455
vs Appleton Papers Inc
Rufus Miller                                                           2004 CV 07751
vs Appleton Papers Inc
Hummel                                                                  1980 CI 000262
vs Appleton Papers Inc
Tammy Hall vs. Appleton Papers
Michael Randolph v Appleton Papers
Alan Derzon                                                         96 CV 3678
v. Appleton Papers Inc
Roger P. Aerts                                                    88-009118
v. Appleton Papers  (W.C. case)
Insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company 
Sharon McLaughlin, Pat Kozlowski, Mildred Jackson,
Ann Holcomb, Cynthia Mosco, Susan McLeod  and
McLaughlin for CCPIIN (owner)   filed with Clerk of Court                                SF Superior no      308779
vs. Appleton Papers Inc. et al
Above plaintiffs dismissed themselves without prejudice
from the Prop 65 case.  Plaintiffs refused to sign settlement
agreement/consent judgment presented by the Defendants
which demanded Plaintiffs agree that ccp did not need a
warning label or emit toxic formaldehyde and/or chemicals.
Including ourselves, families etc.
** new information
We will be adding to this list

Worker's Compensation Cases Won:

Colleen Janee Civil No.B133271 MCS CCP injury

(Name withheld by request) MA Case won on CCP injury

Wisconsin, Plaintiff worked in a Nursing Home using CCP

Rutigliano v. Metro Fuel

Kathy Reilly v. Appleton Papers Inc.
Donna Burke v. Appleton Papers Inc.
Margot Mulligan v. Appleton Papers Inc.
Cooke-Buckhov v. Moore Business Forms et al MA. settled
NSW, Australia
Hughes V. Australian Telecommunications Commission
BC9700999 File NO/S: CA40368/92; DC6791/85
Plaintiff's attorney: Maurice May & Co.
Appeal Granted Judgment of: JJA Beazley, Cole, JA Sheller Concurring "A risk may be foreseeable even if remote."
Lee(Leonie) Hornbyv. Australian Telecommunications Commission
6791/85 CA40368 of 1992 DC 06791 of 1985 cites breast cancer
Campbell v. Arjo Wiggins Carbonless Papers Ltd.

Product Liability/Personal Injury:

Bonnie T. Hayden et al v. Appleton Papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. 86-5232 US District Court PA --Settled

Palma A. Lillis, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton Papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-54250-81 NJ Superior Court Mercer County --Settled

Anita J. Prokopochuk v. McGraw Hill, Inc. and Appleton Papers, Inc et al Civil Action No. L-001267-82 NJ Superior Court Mercer County--Settled

Dorothy A. Brown, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton Papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-000573-83 NJ Superior Court Mercer County--Settled

Janet Leonard, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton Papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-000722-83 NJ Superior Court Mercer County--Settled

Diane L. Cokinos, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton Papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-037483-83 NJ Superior Court Mercer County--Settled

Judith F. Applegate, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-037153-83 NJ Superior Court Mercer County---Settled

Kathleen V. Coleman, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-042964-83 NJ Superior Court mercer County---Settled

Donna Gogan, et al v. McGraw-Hill, Inc. and Appleton Papers, Inc. et al Civil Action No. L-061475-83 NJ Superior Court Mercer County--Settled

Andrew Madziar v. Ultimate Distribution and Appleton papers, Inc et al Civil Action 20454 NJ Court , --Settled

Dorothy Nelson v. Appleton, Missouri settled

Nancy Mageris v Appleton, Utah settled

Kathleen Duncan et al v. Appleton, Seattle, WA 6 plaintiffs settled

Stillman v. Appleton and B. P. Chemical NC status unknown

Margaret Marks v. Appleton Papers, Inc. et al settled


Cinquanti, Ellis v. Appleton Papers Inc. et al settled & dismissed McLaughlin has not signed agreeing to dismiss documents McLaughlin is looking to secure a good malpractice lawyer to pursue this egregrous matter.

The following tolls have been used to avert legal ruling in Massachusetts. This will survive the “junk science” argument. The attorneys are not using the power of the federal government to combat the "junk science" argument. These are accepted by the US Government.

1. Federal Register, August 17, 1994, Part 3. EPA Final Report: Principles of Neurotoxicity Risk Assessment. Available free from EPA's Cincinnati publications center. This document sets forth the accepted differential diagnosis for medical conditions that result from chemical exposures. What state court will throw out a diagnosis following procedures accepted by the U.S. government or declare the diagnostic tests accepted by the U.S. government as "junk science"?

2. Federal Register, April 5, 1994, Part 2. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Indoor Air Quality; Proposed Rule. Available free from the OSHA technical information office. This document sets forth OSHA's findings on the "material adverse health effects" of indoor air pollution from volatile organic compounds (e.g., toluene, formaldehyde) emitted by building materials and office equipment in office buildings. OSHA even provides a chart showing which materials emit each VOC and discusses the effects of mycotoxins from molds in poorly maintained ventilation systems. Health effects include pulmonary effects, cardiovascular effects, neurological effects, reproductive effects, and cancer. What state courts would dismiss OSHA findings as "junk science"? Even though the rule was never finalized, the OSHA findings are still valid.

The medical and legal communities need to use these tools to support the claims of injured workers. I am surprised this information has remained so little used.

You can send for a copy to review: EPA FINAL REPORT: Principles of Neurotoxicity Risk Assessment; request Publication #600Z94001 at 1 800-490-9198. The OSHA Proposed Rule On indoor Air Quality, request #9004 at 1 800-321-6742 .

These sites are to be consideredas distributing collected news to those individuals concerned about ccp toxicity in humans,wildlife
and water systems. Ms. McLaughlin as a free lance reporter, reviews reports, documents and news world wide for these web sites. Any of her news sources areto be considered "confidential informants" and is therefore protected under the !st Amendment and NYS Constitutional Laws. The Shield Lawprotection of sources isdiscussedBeach 62 NY 2d 251-52 Court of Appeals. Judge Wachtler stated, "In my view, therefore, protection from contempt for refusal to disclose a source is not merely a privilege granted to the press by the Legislature, but is essential to the type of freedom of expression traditionally expected in this State and should be recognized as a right guaranteed by the State Constitution." page256

The OSHA Regulations (Standards) Formaldehyde 29 CFR 1910.1048
should be reviewed with OSHA's response to letters requesting
clarification of specific sections. *also the "Article" explanation.
OSHA Hazard Communications 29 CFR 1910.1200 and OSHA's
response letters *read the Trade Secret sections


The following might be of assistance to injured individuals or their attorneys:

Liberty Mutual PA office sent a three page letter to Robert Ellis, Personnel Officer, Camden County Board of Social Services; Camden, NJ. The letter discusses Social Services "employee complaints in the ACU, Food Stamp, Investigation and Codes areas." The 'symptoms included skin rashes, headaches,eye and throat irritation." Ramsey states, "generally speaking, it is believed that most such episodes of complaints are triggered by actual physical condition." Page two lists " handling of specialty papers. For instance, handling of some "no carbon required" papers has been known to cause skin reactions"

State of Wisc. advised Liberty Mutual Ins. was the carrier for Appleton Papers, Inc. early 70's to 1988. Home Indemnity Ins. 1/88 to 1/94. This information was verbally given in the 90's from several state sources.

Liberty NW has referred clients to CCPIIN for assistance.

"US Justice Department is using Civil Racketeering Laws the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in Tobacco Litigation** The government alleges the industry schemed for decades to deceive the public about the dangers ....." "The RICO statute is designed to get remedies where there has been an enterprise that violated fraud statutes, stated William Schultz" " Justice Department lawyers say the industry's past behavior is enough to show a reasonable likihood of future wrongdoing."** Remember that one of the ccp manufacturers was owned until the 1990's by BATUS tobacco company. The same pursuit of the Justice Department should beconsidered in ccp cases. Possibly in Que Tam.

**Tobacco vs. U.S.: Legal fight lights up, Washington, The Associated Press. By Nancy Zuckerbrod in The Post-Standard Sunday, September 19, 2004

The US Department of Justice has the complete motions, complaint
Court testimony etc at the following site:
This gives insight into Rico against the carbonless manufacturers possibilities.


US EPA Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substancesletter from Joseph J. Merenda, Director, Existing Chemical Assessment Division. Sent to Richard A. Lemen, Director of Division of Standards Development and Technology Transfer, NIOSH, CDC dated 8/21/87.Merenda suggested NIOSH use EPA TSCA Laws to obtain information 8(co) which requires companies to keep records of allegations of significant adverse reactions to particular chemicals, processes or effluents, and 8(do), which requires manufacturers, importers and processors to submit unpublished health and safety studieson specified chemicals." This letter was in the NIOSH public file in 11/93 when the McLaughlin's reviewed the ccp files. Plaintiff attorneys might consider this.

The following might be of interest in filing against manufacturers:

The New York Times February 8, 2005 "Charges Issued Over Asbestos At A Mine" By The Associated Press "MISSOULA, Mont., Feb. 7 (AP) - W. R. Grace and seven senior employees were accused in a federal indictment on Monday of knowingly exposing miners and residents in a small town to asbestos." "More than 1,200 people became ill, and some of them died, prosecutors said. The asbestos was naturally present in a vermiculite mine operated by Grace in Libby for nearly 30 years. Prosecutors say asbestos fibers released by the mining sickened miners, as well as residents of the town. The vermiculite was used in household products like insulation.The grand jury said top executives and managers kept secret numerous studies that spelled out the risks that the carcinogenic asbestos posed to customers, employees and residents. " "The indictment accused Grace and the mine manager, Alan Stringer, of trying to obstruct the Environmental Protection Agency in its investigation of the contamination, beginning in 1999, when news reports linked the mine, which has closed, to asbestos poisoning. The environmental agency has declared the mine a Superfund site and has spent more than $55 million to clean it up." The Montana Grand Jury Charges against WR Grace et al online



FREE counter and Web statistics from

Carbonless Copy Paper Injury and Information Network
Last modified: October 26 2006, 12:19pm