Ask the Scholar
Page 3 of 3
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
COLLINS & CORBIN
COUNSELLORS AT LAW
JAN 4 1929
CL
K. CORBIN
ROBERT J. BAIN
ED
A. MARKLEY
DAVID A. NEWTON
1 EXCHANGE PLACE,
HARLES W. BROADHURST
JERSEY CITY, N.J.
HOWAR
PMC INTYRE
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
-2-
would have upon the presentation of this claim
for the first time to our company, then we are
willing to enter into the defense and do all
in our power to defeat the claim. In short,
all that we are agreeing to do at this time is
to assist in the defense of the case and we do
not wish that action on our part to be regarded
as a waiver of our rights to deny liability to
you in the event that it becomes necessary to
decide that question.
Please let me have a reply from you
to this letter stating that you are agreeable
to this arrangement and I shall proceed to assist
in the defense in conjunction with Mr. Smith and
your personal counsel, Mr. Josiah Stryker, of
Messrs. Lindabury, Depue & Faulks.
You replied under date of November 14th,
1928, as follows:-
"Answering your letter of November 13th
regarding the reservation of rights under
policy issued by the Globe Indemnity Company
to us for the period November 4, 1916 to Nov-
ember 4, 1917:
Please be advised that we accept your
assistance in the defense of the above indica-
ted case, with the understanding that the
Globe Indemnity Company have reserved for future
determination any rights which they may have
under the terms of their policy.
You can count on our fullest coopera-
tion in the defense of this action."
Please advise whether this understanding
may continue with respect to both companies, that is the
Aetna Life Insurance Co. and the Globe Indemnity Co.
for this new suit. Also the question of how much cover-
age there is by each of the various insurance companies
must be settled in due time Mr. Emory's letter to you of
Dec. 28, 1928, covers that phase of the matter for his
company. I assume that the Globe Indemnity Co. will
work out its share of coverage as it did in the Canfield
case.
Very truly yours,
[amarrley
EAM: N
Page data
- Page
- 3
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 122c0ae35b6afdcf
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75723608
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75723608",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723608",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Received to C.B. Lee, January 2, 1929",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723608",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75723608",
"label": "Letters Received to C.B. Lee, January 2, 1929",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723608"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75723608",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723608",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Received to C.B. Lee, January 2, 1929",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723608",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723608",
"naId": 75723608,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 3,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001582.pdf",
"mediaId": "122c0ae35b6afdcf",
"ocrText": "COLLINS & CORBIN\nCOUNSELLORS AT LAW\nJAN 4 1929\nCL\nK. CORBIN\nROBERT J. BAIN\nED\nA. MARKLEY\nDAVID A. NEWTON\n1 EXCHANGE PLACE,\nHARLES W. BROADHURST\nJERSEY CITY, N.J.\nHOWAR\nPMC INTYRE\nFRANK A. BOEHLER\nJAMES B. EMORY\nPATRICK F. MC DEVITT\nJanuary 2nd, 1929.\nFRANK P. CLANCY\nRe: Ethelwynne Metz (nee Peer) and Edward T. her\nhusband, and Helen Tuck (nee Phillips) and\nW. M., her husband VS. U. S. Radium Corp.\nMr. C. B. Lee, Pres.,\nU. S. Radium Corp.,\n535 Pearl Street,\nNew York City.\nDear Mr. Lee:-\nI have received a letter from Mr. Burton E.\nEmory, a copy of the summons and complaint in the above\nand also a letter from the Globe Indemnity Co. Both\nCompanies have asked me to represent them with the usual\nreservation as made in my letter to you in the Canfield\ncase, which letter is dated November 13, 1928.\nIn that letter we stated the question of\nreservation as follows:-\n\"Reiterating my telephonic talk with you today,\nplease be advised that the Globe Indemnity Company\nhas retained me to protect its interest in the\nabove case.\nBefore we agree to undertake or assist in the\ndefense of this action, we must have your agreement\nthat all of the rights of the Globe Indemnity Com-\npany with respect to coverage of the claim presen-\nted in this action are reserved to the Globe Indemni-\nty Company pending the determination of the issues\ninvolved in the action, There are a number of\nquestions of coverage involved. There is the ques-\ntion whether or not proper notice of the claim was\ngiven by your company to our company. There is also\nthe question whether or not the policy is broad\nenough to cover a claim of the character presented.\nThere are also other questions of coverage.\nIf you and your company are willing that we\nshould assist in the defense of the case upon the\ncondition precedent that in the event of a judgment\ngoing against your company we are to have the same\nright to raise the question of coverage that we\n-2-\nwould have upon the presentation of this claim\nfor the first time to our company, then we are\nwilling to enter into the defense and do all\nin our power to defeat the claim. In short,\nall that we are agreeing to do at this time is\nto assist in the defense of the case and we do\nnot wish that action on our part to be regarded\nas a waiver of our rights to deny liability to\nyou in the event that it becomes necessary to\ndecide that question.\nPlease let me have a reply from you\nto this letter stating that you are agreeable\nto this arrangement and I shall proceed to assist\nin the defense in conjunction with Mr. Smith and\nyour personal counsel, Mr. Josiah Stryker, of\nMessrs. Lindabury, Depue & Faulks.\nYou replied under date of November 14th,\n1928, as follows:-\n\"Answering your letter of November 13th\nregarding the reservation of rights under\npolicy issued by the Globe Indemnity Company\nto us for the period November 4, 1916 to Nov-\nember 4, 1917:\nPlease be advised that we accept your\nassistance in the defense of the above indica-\nted case, with the understanding that the\nGlobe Indemnity Company have reserved for future\ndetermination any rights which they may have\nunder the terms of their policy.\nYou can count on our fullest coopera-\ntion in the defense of this action.\"\nPlease advise whether this understanding\nmay continue with respect to both companies, that is the\nAetna Life Insurance Co. and the Globe Indemnity Co.\nfor this new suit. Also the question of how much cover-\nage there is by each of the various insurance companies\nmust be settled in due time Mr. Emory's letter to you of\nDec. 28, 1928, covers that phase of the matter for his\ncompany. I assume that the Globe Indemnity Co. will\nwork out its share of coverage as it did in the Canfield\ncase.\nVery truly yours,\n[amarrley\nEAM: N"
}