Ask the Scholar
Page 27 of 30
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
her trouble as radiun poisoning; that a claim was made against the
defendent on May 14, 1931, for the f irst time; that the decodent
died on June 16, 1931; and that the action at law was commended Way
17, 1932.
"It is e well sottled rule in equity that in cases of froud
the timo limit within which the action must be brought will not
Commende to run until the discovery of the fraud, or until the come
plainant was in a situation where, by the exerciso of ressonable
diligence, he vould have discovorod the froud." Lincoln V. Judd,
49 N. J. Ess 387; Partrick Vo Groves, 115 208.
Adcordingly, it might be contended that this rule should be
invoked agninat the docedent and her auccessors in viem of the evi-
dence. The setion et lem was not until Mey 17, 1932.
while Dr. Martland did not diegnose her until Oetober 15, 1930
and her physician and dentist assured her that she dia not suffer
from the radium affliction, she of her own exporience that she
was sufforing from the usual menifestetions of the disenso es she
had had the opportunity to observo. It wes more than the suggestion
of fear in her mind that troubled hor. She sufforod the progressive
effects of the disease. Her associations with known vietims with
whon she even visited the offices of the radium experts when t hey
were being trosted is significant in deternining whether or not a e
vas using reasonable diligence in establishing her true condition
which probably diseoverable as carly as 1925.
In view of the unanimity or opinion of all ourts that the
statute will not be tolled unlesa the plaintiff has shown "rossonable
diligence" the question may vell be reized Inro as to whether or not
the decedent was required to avail hersolf of such medical exemitation
6.8 oould have been made as soon as she entertained suspicions of
her condition as early in 1927. Under the reasoning horoin it
seems unnecessary to decide this question, howevor.
The plaintiff contends that the decedent 010 voice her complaints
and subpicions to at least one Goctor and dentist, as early as 1927 or
Page data
- Page
- 27
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- d9853c16ea42089c
- 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": 27,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0003274_Page_27.jpg",
"mediaId": "d9853c16ea42089c",
"ocrText": "her trouble as radiun poisoning; that a claim was made against the\ndefendent on May 14, 1931, for the f irst time; that the decodent\ndied on June 16, 1931; and that the action at law was commended Way\n17, 1932.\n\"It is e well sottled rule in equity that in cases of froud\nthe timo limit within which the action must be brought will not\nCommende to run until the discovery of the fraud, or until the come\nplainant was in a situation where, by the exerciso of ressonable\ndiligence, he vould have discovorod the froud.\" Lincoln V. Judd,\n49 N. J. Ess 387; Partrick Vo Groves, 115 208.\nAdcordingly, it might be contended that this rule should be\ninvoked agninat the docedent and her auccessors in viem of the evi-\ndence. The setion et lem was not until Mey 17, 1932.\nwhile Dr. Martland did not diegnose her until Oetober 15, 1930\nand her physician and dentist assured her that she dia not suffer\nfrom the radium affliction, she of her own exporience that she\nwas sufforing from the usual menifestetions of the disenso es she\nhad had the opportunity to observo. It wes more than the suggestion\nof fear in her mind that troubled hor. She sufforod the progressive\neffects of the disease. Her associations with known vietims with\nwhon she even visited the offices of the radium experts when t hey\nwere being trosted is significant in deternining whether or not a e\nvas using reasonable diligence in establishing her true condition\nwhich probably diseoverable as carly as 1925.\nIn view of the unanimity or opinion of all ourts that the\nstatute will not be tolled unlesa the plaintiff has shown \"rossonable\ndiligence\" the question may vell be reized Inro as to whether or not\nthe decedent was required to avail hersolf of such medical exemitation\n6.8 oould have been made as soon as she entertained suspicions of\nher condition as early in 1927. Under the reasoning horoin it\nseems unnecessary to decide this question, howevor.\nThe plaintiff contends that the decedent 010 voice her complaints\nand subpicions to at least one Goctor and dentist, as early as 1927 or"
}