Eagle-Picher products in a published workplace testimony record
A federal appellate decision illustrates the difference between identifying a product at a plant and linking it to a particular worker.
A tire-plant maintenance setting
In Robertson v. Allied Signal, Inc., the Third Circuit summarized testimony from a pipe coverer who recalled using Eagle-Picher “66” asbestos cement to insulate piping in a tire-building facility. Areas mentioned included curing operations, a cafeteria and piping leading to a plastic calender.
A second product name
A pipefitter recalled One-Cote cement used to finish joints in the late 1960s. Another witness recalled seeing Eagle-Picher cement at the plant but did not personally use it.
What the court decided
The appellate decision emphasizes the need to connect product use to the specific plaintiffs and their work. It is valuable both as a memory-oriented description of industrial tasks and as a reminder that plant-wide identification does not establish individual exposure.
Read the published opinion
← Eagle-Picher historical library · Original historical documents →
Start with what you remember
Names, packages, dates, coworkers, equipment and photographs can help reconstruct a work history.