Ask the Scholar
Page 2 of 2
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
COPY
July 20, 1935.
C & C 1461 Anita Jo Burricelli VS. United States
Radium orp.
C & C 1484 Harold J. Weber, Admr. ad pros. etc.
VS. United States Radium Corp.
Leonard J. Emmerglick, Esq.,
1172 Raymond Boulevard,
Newark, N.J.
Dear Mr. Emmerglick:
In the Burricelli case Mr. Milton M. Unger appears for the
plaintiff as attorney of record, while you appear in the Weber case.
+ understand, however, from my telephonic talk with you today that you
áre actually in charge of both cases. Therefore I am directing my
correspondence to you at this time although I am writing to Mr. Unger
that if it is agreeable to him, the future correspondence will be directed
to you solely. I am sending him a copy of this letter for his information
The summons and complaint in the Weber case was served on
July 9th while in the Burricelli case it was served on July 10th. We there-
fore have considerable time in which to proceed, although I understand from
my talk with you that we may have additional time if desired, the understand-
ing being that the case will be put at issue about the time the Fall term
opens, if practicable. As soon as I get to it, I shalldraft a demand for
particulars, in each case, and send it to you for acknowledgment of service.
As you know, Judge Forman has not yet decided the case of
La Porte V. U.S. Radium Corp. and of course his decision in that case, I
presume, will have a considerable effect on these cases assuming it is
adverse to you. It would therfore seem to be unnecessary for us to go ahead
with physical examinations, x-rays, blood tests, etc. in the case of Anita
J. Burricelli. May it be understood that in that case we may have these
examinations after the decision by Judge Forman if we then desire them?
Sincerely yours,
EAM: AG
E. A. MARKLEY
Page data
- Page
- 2
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- 19a0b9daf8da5658
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75728984
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75728984",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75728984",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Leonard J. Emmerglick, July 20, 1935",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75728984",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.jpg",
"imageCount": 2,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75728984",
"label": "Letters Sent to Leonard J. Emmerglick, July 20, 1935",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75728984"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75728984",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75728984",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Leonard J. Emmerglick, July 20, 1935",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75728984",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.jpg",
"imageCount": 2,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75728984",
"naId": 75728984,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 2,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003235.pdf",
"mediaId": "19a0b9daf8da5658",
"ocrText": "COPY\nJuly 20, 1935.\nC & C 1461 Anita Jo Burricelli VS. United States\nRadium orp.\nC & C 1484 Harold J. Weber, Admr. ad pros. etc.\nVS. United States Radium Corp.\nLeonard J. Emmerglick, Esq.,\n1172 Raymond Boulevard,\nNewark, N.J.\nDear Mr. Emmerglick:\nIn the Burricelli case Mr. Milton M. Unger appears for the\nplaintiff as attorney of record, while you appear in the Weber case.\n+ understand, however, from my telephonic talk with you today that you\náre actually in charge of both cases. Therefore I am directing my\ncorrespondence to you at this time although I am writing to Mr. Unger\nthat if it is agreeable to him, the future correspondence will be directed\nto you solely. I am sending him a copy of this letter for his information\nThe summons and complaint in the Weber case was served on\nJuly 9th while in the Burricelli case it was served on July 10th. We there-\nfore have considerable time in which to proceed, although I understand from\nmy talk with you that we may have additional time if desired, the understand-\ning being that the case will be put at issue about the time the Fall term\nopens, if practicable. As soon as I get to it, I shalldraft a demand for\nparticulars, in each case, and send it to you for acknowledgment of service.\nAs you know, Judge Forman has not yet decided the case of\nLa Porte V. U.S. Radium Corp. and of course his decision in that case, I\npresume, will have a considerable effect on these cases assuming it is\nadverse to you. It would therfore seem to be unnecessary for us to go ahead\nwith physical examinations, x-rays, blood tests, etc. in the case of Anita\nJ. Burricelli. May it be understood that in that case we may have these\nexaminations after the decision by Judge Forman if we then desire them?\nSincerely yours,\nEAM: AG\nE. A. MARKLEY"
}