Letters Received to C.B. Lee, January 2, 1929

COLLINS & CORBIN COUNSELLORS AT LAW JAN 4 1929 CL K. CORBIN ROBERT J. BAIN ED 4. MARKLEY DAVID A. NEWTON 1 EXCHANGE PLACE, HARLES w. BROADHURST JERSEY CITY, N.J. HOWAR FRANK A. BOEHLER JAMES B. EMORY PATRICK F. MC DEVITT January 2nd, 1929. FRANK P. CLANCY Re: Ethelwynne Metz (nee Peer) and Edward T. her husband, and Helen Tuck (nee Phillips) and W. M., her husband VS. U. S. Radium Corp. Mr. C. B. Lee, Pres., U. S. Radium Corp., 535 Pearl Street, New York City. Dear Mr. Lee:- I have received a letter from Mr. Burton E. Emory, a copy of the summons and complaint in the above and also a letter from the Globe Indemnity Co. Both Companies have asked me to represent them with the usual reservation as made in my letter to you in the Canfield case, which letter is dated November 13, 1928. In that letter we stated the question of reservation as follows:- "Reiterating my telephonic talk with you today, please be advised that the Globe Indemnity Company has retained me to protect its interest in the above case. Before we agree to undertake or assist in the defense of this action, we must have your agreement that all of the rights of the Globe Indemnity Com- pany with respect to coverage of the claim presen- ted in this action are reserved to the Globe Indemni- ty Company pending the determination of the issues involved in the action, There are a number of questions of coverage involved. There is the ques- tion whether or not proper notice of the claim was given by your company to our company. There is also the question whether or not the policy is broad enough to cover a claim of the character presented. There are also other questions of coverage. If you and your company are willing that we should assist in the defense of the case upon the condition precedent that in the event of a judgment going against your company we are to have the same right to raise the question of coverage that we