- -----------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date of Report (Date of Earliest Event Reported)
August 22, 1995
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware 1-815 51-0014090
(State or Other (Commission (I.R.S. Employer
Jurisdiction of File Number) Identification No.)
Incorporation)
1007 Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19898
(Address of principal executive offices)
Registrant's telephone number,
including area code: (302) 774-1000
- ---------------------------------------------------------
<PAGE>
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this
report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
hereunto duly authorized.
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY
(Registrant)
/s/ D. B. Smith
-----------------------------------
D. B. Smith
Assistant Controller
August 22, 1995
<PAGE>
Item 5. Other Events
In connection with Debt and/or Equity Securities
that may be offered on a delayed or continuous basis under
Registration Statements on Form S-3 (No. 33-48128,
No. 33-53327 and No. 33-61339), we hereby file the
following press release.
Exhibit
Number Description of Exhibit
99 Press release of registrant in response
to the $115,000,000 fine issued by U.S.
District Judge Robert J. Elliott of
Columbus, Georgia on August 21, 1995
against the registrant for allegedly
withholding key evidence in a 1993 trial
which was part of the continuing Benlate
DF fungicide litigation. The 1993 trial
was settled before the jury reached a
verdict.
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
Number Description
99 Press release of registrant in response
to the $115,000,000 fine issued by U.S.
District Judge Robert J. Elliott of
Columbus, Georgia on August 21, 1995
against the registrant for allegedly
withholding key evidence in a 1993 trial
which was part of the continuing Benlate
DF fungicide litigation. The 1993 trial
was settled before the jury reached a
verdict.
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 99
"We are greatly disappointed by the judge's ruling,
but not surprised since this court has ruled against
DuPont on essentially every issue beginning with pretrial
hearings. We will appeal this unreasonable decision."
"Unfortunately, the plaintiff's attorneys in this
proceeding have not focused on the question of injury to
plants but rather on claims of discovery abuse. They have
repeatedly protested that documents were not submitted on
a timely basis, in the proper order, or in a manner most
convenient to them. Millions of documents have always
been open and available to these plaintiffs attorneys as
they have been in the dozens of other cases involved in
the 'Benlate' litigation. Unlike most other courts which
have dismissed or never even been asked to consider such
complaints, this court has condoned and accepted
Plaintiffs' Attorney Neal Pope's 'discovery abuse'
strategy and, has scolded and sanctioned DuPont lawyers
for being unable to meet every whimsical demand of these
plaintiffs."
"We want to assure all DuPont customers,
shareholders, employees and the general public that no
DuPont employees nor any of the company's attorneys ever
concealed or withheld any data illegally or
inappropriately. And that Alston and Bird, our attorneys
in Georgia and elsewhere, acted honorably and ethically in
this regard. However, it is obvious that, even with our
best efforts, we will not be able to satisfy this court."
