Ask the Scholar
Page 3 of 7
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
stances ingested into the body of the plaintiff is such that the fact and
effect of such ingestion are not manifested or made known to the individual
until many years thereafter, and in fact the plaintiff had no knowledge or
notice of the true facts respecting the ingestion into and injury to her
body by these substances and the effects thereof until the arly part of 1935.
Relying upon the representations above stated and mislead by the concealment
above mentioned, the plaintiff took up and carried on her employment for the
period stated. The action of the plaintiff in doing so was the result of
fraudulent representation, conscious, wilful concealment, and conduct in-
tended to mislead the plaintiff and to conceal from her the true facts known
to the defendant and with which the defendant was charged with knowledge, re-
specting her employment to apply the substances above stated to the products
manufactured by the defendant.
11.
The plaintiff charges in addition that the defendant was under
a. duty to disclose the facts hereinabove mentioned and to use due care as
hereinabove mentioned in paragraph nine, which it failed to perform and
that in addition, it, by its conduct, took an undue and uneonscientious ad-
vantage of theplaintiff by and independent of the failure to perform those
duties, and further, concealed facts from the plaintiff to induce her to
take up and continue her employment, and concealed from her knowledge that
a cause of action would, or might arise in favor of the plaintiff against
the defendant, and so mislead her as to cause her not to institute legal
proceedings based upon said cause of action until many years after the
cessation of her employment.
12.
The naturel and proximate result of the conduct of the defend-
ant was to mislead the plaintiff and to conceal from her the fact that a
cause of action arose or might arise in her favor and against the defendant
because of the latter's breaches of duty as apresaid, until 1935.
13.
The plaintiff charges that under the circumstances it would
be inequitable and unjust to permit the defendant to set up in
defense to the action of the plaintiff now pending in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey, that the action is barred by
the statute of limitations of this State, the defendant being chargeable with
Page data
- Page
- 3
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- e8933dc6c715263f
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75729062
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75729062",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729062",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Copies of Court Documents, August 26, 1935",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729062",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 7,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75729062",
"label": "Copies of Court Documents, August 26, 1935",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729062"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75729062",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729062",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Copies of Court Documents, August 26, 1935",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729062",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_1.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_1.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_1.jpg",
"imageCount": 7,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729062",
"naId": 75729062,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 3,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003254_Page_3.jpg",
"mediaId": "e8933dc6c715263f",
"ocrText": "stances ingested into the body of the plaintiff is such that the fact and\neffect of such ingestion are not manifested or made known to the individual\nuntil many years thereafter, and in fact the plaintiff had no knowledge or\nnotice of the true facts respecting the ingestion into and injury to her\nbody by these substances and the effects thereof until the arly part of 1935.\nRelying upon the representations above stated and mislead by the concealment\nabove mentioned, the plaintiff took up and carried on her employment for the\nperiod stated. The action of the plaintiff in doing so was the result of\nfraudulent representation, conscious, wilful concealment, and conduct in-\ntended to mislead the plaintiff and to conceal from her the true facts known\nto the defendant and with which the defendant was charged with knowledge, re-\nspecting her employment to apply the substances above stated to the products\nmanufactured by the defendant.\n11.\nThe plaintiff charges in addition that the defendant was under\na. duty to disclose the facts hereinabove mentioned and to use due care as\nhereinabove mentioned in paragraph nine, which it failed to perform and\nthat in addition, it, by its conduct, took an undue and uneonscientious ad-\nvantage of theplaintiff by and independent of the failure to perform those\nduties, and further, concealed facts from the plaintiff to induce her to\ntake up and continue her employment, and concealed from her knowledge that\na cause of action would, or might arise in favor of the plaintiff against\nthe defendant, and so mislead her as to cause her not to institute legal\nproceedings based upon said cause of action until many years after the\ncessation of her employment.\n12.\nThe naturel and proximate result of the conduct of the defend-\nant was to mislead the plaintiff and to conceal from her the fact that a\ncause of action arose or might arise in her favor and against the defendant\nbecause of the latter's breaches of duty as apresaid, until 1935.\n13.\nThe plaintiff charges that under the circumstances it would\nbe inequitable and unjust to permit the defendant to set up in\ndefense to the action of the plaintiff now pending in the United States\nDistrict Court for the District of New Jersey, that the action is barred by\nthe statute of limitations of this State, the defendant being chargeable with"
}