Letters Received to Burton E. Emory, C.B. Lee, Geo. W. Pesinger, Chas. Stockdell Gray, December 18, 1930

December 18,1930. Metz and Tuck V. U. S. Radium Corp. Burton E. Emory, Ewc. , Mgr. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 100 William St., N.Y. C.B.Lee,Eq., Pres. United States Radium Corp. 535 Pearl St., N.Y.C. George W. Pesinger, Esq., New Amsterdam Casualty Co., 60 John St., N.Y.C. Chas. Stockdell Gray, Esq., Counsel, Globe Indemnity Co., 20 Washington Pl., Newark, N.J. Messrs. Edwards & Smith, 1 Exchange Pl., Jersey Sity, N.J. Gentlemen: This letter is written at the request of all concerned and without prejudice to the rights of anyone for the purpose of crystalizing the conclusions reached at the conference held at the office of Burton E. Emory, Esq., 100 William St., New York City, on December 16,1930 at 2:00 P.M It is the understanding that each person for the company whom he represents will reply stating just what part of the determinations hereinafter set forth are acceptable. The conference was called primarily for the purpose of considering the two cases of Metz and Tuck vs. United States Radium Corporation which are set for trial for January 15, ,1931, and the two claims, one in behalf of Mrs. Saxer and the other in behalf of the Estate of Mrs. Stasi. It was also pointed out that there are pending in addition to the Metz and Tuck cases, the actions of Mrs. Madlinger and Mrs. Hoare. Mr. Pesinger stated that on behalf of his company he was agreeable to a settlement of the Tuck case for $8000.00 and that on behalf of his company he was willing to pay its proportionate share of that sume. However, he said that he was determined to have the question of coverage settled at this time and also the question of what proportion his company should legally bear of the total amount. He therefore insists that there should be a suit brought by the Radium Company for the purpose of collecting from the insurance companies involved, the $8000.00 to be paid in settlement of the Tuck case. Whether that suit is won or lost by the Radium Company, his company will nevertheless pay its proportionate share of the $8000.00. This he is willing to do because he feels that his company has waived any question of coverage in this case by undertaking the defense thereof.