Ask the Scholar
Page 3 of 3
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
COPY
POTTER AND BERRY
60 Park Place
Newark, N. J.
February 27, 1929.
Edward A. Markley, Esq.,
c/o Collins & Corbin,
#1 Exchange Place,
Jersey City, New Jersey.
Dear Mr. Markley: Re: Canfield vs. U. S. Radium Corporation.
I have had considerable communication with you
and Mr. Smith relative to the physical examination of Mrs.
Canfield. As you know, I have to suit the convenience of not
only yourself and your doctors, but also that of my doctors,
my client and myself. That makes, I feel, a short notice ex-
amination an impossibility. In order to settle the matter I
wish, therefore, to make this suggestion.
I will present Mrs. Canfield in this office
on Sunday, March 17, 1929, at 10 o'clock in the forenoon, for
examination by Doctors Brother and Rector. I will have my doc-
tors present at that time. May I further say that I trust that
at the time of the examination, that your doctors will confine
themselves to the intent and spirit of the statute under which
they are to examine.
I discussed with Judge Smith the nature of the
order which he signed and requested that it be delimited. He
told me, however, that the proper procedure would be to simply
refuse to allow the examination to go beyond what I considered
to be the proper limit and then, if you insisted, to have the
point brought before him to be ruled on. The two things which
I, of course, had in mind as basis of objection, were examina-
tions by Dr. Schlundt and Dr. Flinn who are not physicians and
who, therefore, I do not think should participate in the examina-
tion, and secondly, the taking of blood. Dr. St. George will be
present, however, and the matter of the blood picture could be
handled by his taking the blood in the presence of your doctors.
if that is agreeable. I do not think that the statute contem-
plates necessitating anyone's undergoing even a minor operation
for the sake of litigation.
On the matter of electroscopic tests, in view
of what has previously transpired with reference to Dr. Flinn, I
can say now that without a specific order of the Court, explicit-
ly naming him as one to participate in the examination, I will not
Edward A. Markley, Esq., #2.
permit my olient to submit to any examination in his presence.
I will not object to the presence of Dr. Schlundt, providing be
does not conduct the test.
Will you please let me know if this arrngement
is agreeable to you and Mr. Smith.
Very truly yours,
Potter & Berry
By RAYMOND H. BERRY
RHB:RK
Page data
- Page
- 3
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- eab4087a0f548337
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75723859
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75723859",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723859",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Edward A. Markley [E.A. Markley], February 27, 1929",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723859",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001647_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001647_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001647_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75723859",
"label": "Letters Sent to Edward A. Markley [E.A. Markley], February 27, 1929",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723859"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75723859",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723859",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Edward A. Markley [E.A. Markley], February 27, 1929",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723859",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001647_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001647_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001647_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 3,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75723859",
"naId": 75723859,
"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_0001647.pdf",
"mediaId": "eab4087a0f548337",
"ocrText": "COPY\nPOTTER AND BERRY\n60 Park Place\nNewark, N. J.\nFebruary 27, 1929.\nEdward A. Markley, Esq.,\nc/o Collins & Corbin,\n#1 Exchange Place,\nJersey City, New Jersey.\nDear Mr. Markley: Re: Canfield vs. U. S. Radium Corporation.\nI have had considerable communication with you\nand Mr. Smith relative to the physical examination of Mrs.\nCanfield. As you know, I have to suit the convenience of not\nonly yourself and your doctors, but also that of my doctors,\nmy client and myself. That makes, I feel, a short notice ex-\namination an impossibility. In order to settle the matter I\nwish, therefore, to make this suggestion.\nI will present Mrs. Canfield in this office\non Sunday, March 17, 1929, at 10 o'clock in the forenoon, for\nexamination by Doctors Brother and Rector. I will have my doc-\ntors present at that time. May I further say that I trust that\nat the time of the examination, that your doctors will confine\nthemselves to the intent and spirit of the statute under which\nthey are to examine.\nI discussed with Judge Smith the nature of the\norder which he signed and requested that it be delimited. He\ntold me, however, that the proper procedure would be to simply\nrefuse to allow the examination to go beyond what I considered\nto be the proper limit and then, if you insisted, to have the\npoint brought before him to be ruled on. The two things which\nI, of course, had in mind as basis of objection, were examina-\ntions by Dr. Schlundt and Dr. Flinn who are not physicians and\nwho, therefore, I do not think should participate in the examina-\ntion, and secondly, the taking of blood. Dr. St. George will be\npresent, however, and the matter of the blood picture could be\nhandled by his taking the blood in the presence of your doctors.\nif that is agreeable. I do not think that the statute contem-\nplates necessitating anyone's undergoing even a minor operation\nfor the sake of litigation.\nOn the matter of electroscopic tests, in view\nof what has previously transpired with reference to Dr. Flinn, I\ncan say now that without a specific order of the Court, explicit-\nly naming him as one to participate in the examination, I will not\nEdward A. Markley, Esq., #2.\npermit my olient to submit to any examination in his presence.\nI will not object to the presence of Dr. Schlundt, providing be\ndoes not conduct the test.\nWill you please let me know if this arrngement\nis agreeable to you and Mr. Smith.\nVery truly yours,\nPotter & Berry\nBy RAYMOND H. BERRY\nRHB:RK"
}