Ask the Scholar

Page 17 of 30
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 17

OCR

few experts and little settled knowledge. Some experts in 1920 con- sidered anall quantities of redium such es the painters ingested benoficial to the humen system. There is apperently no express state- ment to the contrary. It is tempting in the light of the knowledge of today and the experience sinee 1980 to oreate the thought that the defendant must have been negligent in some way. Today, industrial methods which the defendent then employed would not be merely negligent but criminal. But it should be carefully noted that this cese must be decided on the facts as they existed in the light of the knowledge of 1917 to 1920. were safety measures such as scientifie ventilation, masks, periodical medical exeminations, abolition of brush pointing, and other now known precautions to be considored necessary as of 1920% Actually, the defendant and its resesrch bureau feiled to enti- cipate what later research and scientific investigation proved to be e fact; nemely that the defendant's dial painters in 1980 were exposed to the gravest of dangera in thoir occupation. The fact is that this experience was not brought home to science and medicine until a considerable number of cases such as that at bar had been considered and then the knowledge came slowly, only to be accepted as feot several yeara after the first necrosis cases wore exposed. Notwithstanding the Tact that the court is convinced that the plaintiff is not entitled to the rolier he socks on the ground of undisclosed fraud, the seriousness of the conseguences of the de- cision makes it desirable to review briefly the New Jersey author- ities defining the limits of the so-ealled doctrine of fraudulent concealment. The New Jersey statute of limitations which is applicable to tort actions provides: -* * * all actions hereafter accruing for in- juries to persons caused by the wrongrul act, neglect or default of any a et * corporation or corporation within this state, shall be comment- ed and instituted within two years next efter

Page data

Page
17
Source index
0
Type
photo
Media ID
f5fc09f655fcfacf
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
75729134
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data
{
    "id": "75729134",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729134",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Deposition, December 17, 1935",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729134",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_01.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_01.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_01.jpg",
    "imageCount": 30,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity
{
    "localId": "75729134",
    "label": "Deposition, December 17, 1935",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729134"
}
Document source metadata
{
    "id": "75729134",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729134",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Deposition, December 17, 1935",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729134",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_01.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_01.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_01.jpg",
    "imageCount": 30,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75729134",
    "naId": 75729134,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
    "seq": 17,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_17.jpg",
    "mediaId": "f5fc09f655fcfacf",
    "ocrText": "few experts and little settled knowledge. Some experts in 1920 con-\nsidered anall quantities of redium such es the painters ingested\nbenoficial to the humen system. There is apperently no express state-\nment to the contrary.\nIt is tempting in the light of the knowledge of today and the\nexperience sinee 1980 to oreate the thought that the defendant must\nhave been negligent in some way. Today, industrial methods which the\ndefendent then employed would not be merely negligent but criminal.\nBut it should be carefully noted that this cese must be decided on\nthe facts as they existed in the light of the knowledge of 1917 to\n1920. were safety measures such as scientifie ventilation, masks,\nperiodical medical exeminations, abolition of brush pointing, and\nother now known precautions to be considored necessary as of 1920%\nActually, the defendant and its resesrch bureau feiled to enti-\ncipate what later research and scientific investigation proved to\nbe e fact; nemely that the defendant's dial painters in 1980 were\nexposed to the gravest of dangera in thoir occupation.\nThe fact is that this experience was not brought home to science\nand medicine until a considerable number of cases such as that at\nbar had been considered and then the knowledge came slowly, only to\nbe accepted as feot several yeara after the first necrosis cases\nwore exposed.\nNotwithstanding the Tact that the court is convinced that the\nplaintiff is not entitled to the rolier he socks on the ground of\nundisclosed fraud, the seriousness of the conseguences of the de-\ncision makes it desirable to review briefly the New Jersey author-\nities defining the limits of the so-ealled doctrine of fraudulent\nconcealment.\nThe New Jersey statute of limitations which is applicable to\ntort actions provides:\n-*\n* * all actions hereafter accruing for in-\njuries to persons caused by the wrongrul act,\nneglect or default of any a et * corporation or\ncorporation within this state, shall be comment-\ned and instituted within two years next efter"
}