Viewing page 75 of 86

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

27. The unfairness of compelling defendant's witnesses to journey to Monroe County is strongly accentuated by the fact that plaintiff's action is clearly without foundation. The plaintiff agreed to receive $4,796.67 for the paintings in question, and this sum was offered to her. It seems poor recompense on the part of plaintiff to impose upon defendant the burden of a trial in Monroe County considering that defendant at all times was more than ready to assist plaintiff in her difficulties by advancing monies to her and by storing her paintings free, a service which defendant does not and has not offered to any artist.

28. Since this motion is based upon defendant's claim that it will be unjust to it to require defendant's witnesses to travel to Rochester for the trial, the Court's attention is respectfully invited to the fact that plaintiff is seldom in Rochester and does not presently reside there. For the past four years, she has been in Rochester for short and sporadic visits. This is evidenced by a letter, dated April 15th, 1948, sent by plaintiff to deponent, wherein she stated: - 

"As I stated over the phone, I'm visiting my parents for a week or two, at the very most. I haven't seen them since the early part of last October."

A copy of this letter is marked Exhibit "E", is annexed hereto and made a part hereof.

29. The plaintiff resided in New York County for four years commencing in or about 1943, when she attended the Art Student's League. She has travelled all over the United States. From June to September, 1947, she was in MacDowell Colony, New Hampshire, and in Cape Cod. In September, 1947, she returned to New York and lived at 114 West 11th Street, County of New York. Since the latter part of September, 1948, the plaintiff has been in Europe and is presently residing in Italy. On November 28th,

-8-