1186 William Zeffert—For Plaintiff-Cross you produced the original. A. I never got it. I could not produce it. “Q. The corporation of which you were an officer was requested to produce the original letter. A. I haven't got it. “Q. Where is the original? A. I never never received it. “Q. But you are not the only officer of the corporation. Where is the original letter? A. I said I never received it and I told you in my last testimony I would ask my partner if he did re1187 ceive it. I would ask him, and he never had that “Q. Never had it? A. Never got it. “Q. You talked with Mr. Golding did you, since you were here last? A. That is right. “Q. And he told you what? A. I asked him for the letter that you asked for as of June 6th from the insurance company and he said he had no such letter." Do you recall that? A. That is perfectly right. Q. Then you did talk to him about it? A. Not 1188 about the letter. Mr. Cuff: I object to whether he talked to him about it. He has already admitted that he asked him to produce the letter and he said he never saw it. How could he talk about the contents when he never saw it? To the extent that he did ask him for a letter to produce it in accordance with the request, that is admitted by the witness. Mr. Berger: It is not admitted by the witness. It has been strenuously denied William Zeffert-For Plaintiff-Cross 1189 1190 under oath, and this very morning this wit- Mr. Cuff: Of course he did. Mr. Berger: And I offered this testimony in direct contradiction of his testimony this very morning. Mr. Cuff: I think it is perfectly apparent just what Mr. Berger is trying to do. Mr. Berger: It certainly.is. Mr. Cuff: When Mr. Berger was asking Mr. Zeffert about that letter he read a certain paragraph and asked him if he had ever discussed that paragraph or the contents or the substance with Mr. Golding. The Court: He said he had not. Mr. Cuff: He said he had never seen the The Court: After his first examination? Mr. Cuff: Exception. Not that I care 1191 Q. Then you did talk to Mr. Golding about the letter between the session of July 17th and July 27th? Mr. Cuff: I object to that as having already been answered. He admitted that he asked him for the letter. 1192 William Zeffert-For Plaintiff—Cross Mr. Berger: He didn't admit any such thing. The Court: I will let him answer it again. A. I asked him if he received the letter and he fold me no. We did not suggest the letter because he had not received it. Q. You mean he told you he had not reecived it? A. He told me he had not received it. Q. You don't know whether he received it or 1193 not? Mr. Cuff : I object to that as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial. The Court: He said he told him that he did not receive it. Mr. Berger: I demand the production of the original letter of June 29th. (Letter produced by Mr. Cuff.) Q. I show you this letter dated June 29th, 1931, which in your examination under oath on July 17th was marked as Exhibit 8 of that session. I to look at it. 1194 ask you Mr. Cuff : I have no objection to its being offered in evidence. Mr. Berger: I offer it in evidence. (Received in evidence and marked Defendants' Exhibit Z.) Q. Did you ever read that letter, yes or no? A. This letter? Q. Yes. A. I don't remember reading this letter. William Zeffert-For Plaintiff-Cross 1195 Q. You don't remember reading that letter. Didn't you regard that letter as important? Mr. Cuff: That is objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, whether he regarded it as important or not. The Court: If he did not read it how could he regard it as important? 1196 A. I might and might not have read that letter. Q. But you might have read it? A. Might and might not. My attorney took care of most of these things. Q. Who received this letter, you or Mr. Golding? That is, who opened the letter and first saw it? A. Either Mr. Golding or the bookkeeper. I cannot say which. Q. Did Mr. Golding ever show you this letter? A. I don't think so. Q. Did you ever have any discussion with Mr. Golding concerning the contents of that letter? A. I don't think so. Q. Didn't you read this letter in the course of the preparation for trial of this very case that we are on hère today? A. I doubt it. Q. What is your best thought on it? A. My best thought is that I left all these matters to my counsel and I did not go into these matters at all. Q. And you now express serious doubt as to whether you ever in the course of the preparation of this case for trial saw this letter or discussed this letter? 1197 I certainly think that is in Mr. Cuff : competent. 1198 William Zeffert-For Plaintiff-Cross The Court: I think he has answered it but I will let him answer it again if you want to. Q. You read that letter in the office of Powers, Kaplan & Berger on July 17th, 1931, didn't you? A. If you gave it to me to read then I probably read it. Q. Has it made no impression on your mind as to what happened at that session? 1199 Mr. Cuff: I object to the impression made on his mind at this examination. I don't think that is evidence in this case or material in this case. The Court: I will let him answer it if he can. 1200 A. I formed no impression whatsoever. Q. At page 52 of your examination under oath under date of July 17th, 1931, do you recall this question and answer: “Q. Did you subsequent to the 6th day of June, 1931, receive another letter addressed to your company, Crest Furniture, Inc., under date of June 29th, 1931? A. Yes, I received this." Do you recall that question and that answer? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then by Mr. Kaplan: “Counsel for the assured produced the original of letter dated June 29th, 1931, on the letterhead of the Board of New York Fire Underwriters addressed to Crest Furniture, Inc., 138 Fifth Avenue, New York City, and Messrs. Goldstein & Company, New York City. Same is marked Exhibit 8 of this date.” Do you recall that? A. Yes, sir. |