The Gay Sisters Page #2

YOU KNOW, THIS IS IN THE MATTER

OF THE WILL OF:

THE LATE PENN GAYLORD,

AND I AM THE PROPONEN OF THAT WILL.

THIS CASE WAS ORIGINALLY

IN THE SURROGATE COURT,

BUT BECAUSE OF ITS

EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES,

IT WAS TRANSFERRED

TO THIS COURT,

WHERE IT WAS BEING HEARD

BEFORE YOUR HONOR'S

DISTINGUISHED PREDECESSOR,

JUDGE McCARTHY,

WHOSE UNTIMELY DEATH

HAS BEREAVED US ALL.

WHEN DID:

PENN GAYLORD DIE?

IN 1918.

23 YEARS AGO.

YES, YOUR HONOR.

AND YOU'RE STILL TRYING

TO GET THE WILL PROBATED?

YES, YOUR HONOR.

WELL, JUST WHAT HAS HAPPENED

IN ALL THESE 23 YEARS?

WHEN PENN GAYLORD DIED, THERE

IMMEDIATELY APPEARED ANOTHER WILL

WHICH, IT IS CLAIMED, WAS EXECUTED

IN FRANCE JUST BEFORE HE DIED.

SO THERE WAS NATURALLY

A WILL CONTEST.

WELL, WAS THERE

A GREAT DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN THE FRENCH WILL

AND THE AMERICAN WILL?

NO, YOUR HONOR, EXCEP THAT UNDER THE FRENCH WILL,

PENN GAYLORD SET ASIDE

10% OF HIS ESTATE

AS A TRUST FUND:

FOR A CERTAIN CHARITY,

AND IT'S THAT CHARITY WHICH

IS FIGHTING TO ESTABLISH

THE VALIDITY:

OF THE FRENCH WILL.

AND WHO REPRESENTS THE PROPONEN OF THE FRENCH WILL HERE?

THAT IS TO SAY,

THE CHARITY.

YOUR HONOR, IT'S I WHO REPRESEN THAT WORTHY INSTITUTION.

WELL, MR. WHEELER,

AS THE COUNSEL,

CAN YOU TELL ME SOMETHING

ABOUT WHAT THIS CHARITY IS

WHICH IS FIGHTING

FOR THIS FRENCH WILL?

IT'S A SETTLEMENT HOUSE

FOR WORKING BOYS-

THE THIRD AVENUE

NEIGHBORHOOD CLUB.

MY LEARNED OPPONENT HERE

HAS BEEN TRYING TO PROVE

THAT PENN GAYLORD WAS

SHELL-SHOCKED AND OUT OF HIS MIND

WHEN HE MADE:

THE FRENCH WILL,

WHILE I CONTEND THAT PENN

GAYLORD HAD AT THAT TIME

A CLEARER VISION AND A BETTER

UNDERSTANDING OF HIS FELLOW MEN

THAN HE HAD:

EVER HAD BEFORE.

THANK YOU, MR. WHEELER.

CONTINUE, MR. GIBBON.

WITH THE ESTATE TIED UP BY THIS CONTEST,

THE 3 LITTLE GAYLORD ORPHANS

DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY,

SO WE HAD TO MAKE APPEALS FOR ALLOWANCES

TO ENABLE THE ORPHANS TO

FIGHT THIS FRENCH WILL,

WHICH WE CLAIMED- AND

STILL CLAIM- IS INVALID.

WE LOST TWO YEARS IN JUS GETTING THE GUARDIANS APPOINTED

AND THESE ALLOWANCES

APPROVED.

AND ARE THESE:

THE 3 LITTLE ORPHANS?

YES, YOUR HONOR.

MISS FIONA GAYLORD...

LADY BURTON,

EVELYN GAYLORD...

MISS SUSANNA GAYLORD.

3 LITTLE KITTENS WHO LOST THEIR MITTENS.

AND NOW, MR. GIBBON,

WHO HAS BEEN:

ADMINISTERING THE ESTATE

ALL THESE YEARS?

MR. VAN RENNSAELER,

UNTIL HIS DEATH,

WHEN I BECAME TEMPORARY ADMINISTRATOR.

WHAT HAPPENED:

AFTER THAT?

THIS SECOND WILL, HAVING

BEEN EXECUTED IN FRANCE,

WE HAD TO SEND:

ATTORNEYS TO FRANCE

TO TAKE DEPOSITIONS

AND EXAMINE WITNESSES.

TWO YEARS WERE LOS IN THAT.

WELL, THEN

WHAT HAPPENED?

ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES, YOUR

HONOR, WAS WHETHER THE FRENCH WILL

SHOULD BE INTERPRETED AND PROVEN IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF FRANCE

OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH

THE LAWS OF NEW YORK.

THE SURROGATE RULED THA THE FRENCH LAWS SHOULD APPLY,

BUT THE COURT OF APPEALS

OVERRULED HIS DECISION.

AND HOW LONG:

DID THAT TAKE?

ANOTHER TWO YEARS.

AND AFTER THE TRIAL COUR WAS REVERSED,

ALL THAT TESTIMONY WHICH

HERETOFORE HAD BEEN TAKEN IN FRANCE

BECAME WORTHLESS

TO EITHER SIDE.

AGAIN WE HAD TO ISSUE

DEPOSITIONS, APPOINT ATTORNEYS,

FIND THOSE WITNESSES,

START ALL OVER AGAIN.

GRANTING ALL THAT,

WHAT HELD YOU UP

THIS TIME?

WHEN WE GO TO FRANCE, YOUR HONOR,

WE DISCOVERED THAT TWO

OF OUR PRINCIPAL WITNESSES

HAD SUDDENLY DISAPPEARED.

THEY WERE ENGINEERS AND WERE

SURVEYING IN THE AFRICAN CONGO.

BY THE TIME:

THEY CAME BACK-

ANOTHER YEAR.

YES, YOUR HONOR, ANOTHER YEAR.

AND I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS

OCCASION TO TELL YOUR HONOR

THAT THERE WAS NOT A MOMENT'S

DELAY THAT COULD BE AT ANY TIME

ASCRIBED TO ANY DILATORY

TACTICS ON MY PART!

I WASN'T IMPLYING

THAT, MR. GIBBON.

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

AND THEN,

JUST AS WE WERE ABOU TO HAVE THE WILL

ADMITTED TO PROBATE,

A FRENCH LADY- WELL, WE'LL

CALL HER A LADY, AT ANY RATE-

WHO HAD NURSED PENN GAYLORD

WHILE HE WAS RECOVERING

FROM SHELL SHOCK

IN A FRENCH SANITARIUM,

CLAIMED THAT PRIOR TO HIS

RETURN TO THE BATTLEFIELD,

SHE HAD BECOME HIS WIFE.

IT TOOK 6 YEARS TO

ELIMINATE HER FROM THE CASE.

APPARENTLY, NOTHING THA COULD HAPPEN IN A CASE

FAILED TO HAPPEN

IN THIS CASE.

NO, YOUR HONOR.

SINCE THIS CONTES SEEMS TO BE

OVER 10%

OF THE ESTATE,

DIDN'T IT EVER OCCUR TO

ANYONE THAT IT MIGHT BE

SETTLED AMICABLY BETWEEN

THE HEIRS AND THE CHARITY?

OH, CERTAINLY,

YOUR HONOR.

THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN

TALK OF SETTLEMENT.

AS A MATTER OF FACT,

ABOUT 4 YEARS AGO,

WE WERE ON THE VERGE OF

SETTLEMENT WHEN SOMEONE-

I KNOW-

SOMEONE DIED.

NO, YOUR HONOR,

NOT THIS TIME.

BUT, MOST REGRETTABLY, THE

CHARITY BROKE OFF NEGOTIATIONS

AND REFUSED TO SETTLE.

NO, IT WASN'T THE CHARITY

THAT REFUSED TO SETTLE.

IT WAS ONE MAN:

WHO WORMED HIMSELF

INTO THE CONTROL OF THE CHARITY

- CHARLES BARCLAY.

IT'S HE WHO REFUSED

TO SETTLE.

THE GAYLORD SISTERS HAVE ALWAYS

BEEN WILLING TO GIVE TO THE CHARITY

THE 10% WHICH THEY MIGHT HAVE

GOTTEN UNDER THE FRENCH WILL,

AND WE'RE WILLING

TO DO IT NOW.

BUT THAT'S NO WHAT THEY WANT.

THEY WANT TO PROLONG THIS

LITIGATION OVER THE QUESTION

OF WHETHER THE FRENCH WILL

WAS VALID OR NOT INDEFINITELY,

AND THE MAN WHO IS BEHIND

THEM IS CHARLES BARCLAY.

AND IF IT HADN' BEEN FOR HIM,

THIS CASE WOULD HAVE

BEEN SETTLED YEARS AGO.

I MUST CAUTION YOU, MISS FIONA,

YOU'LL ONLY COMPLICATE THE CASE.

COMPLICATE IT?

OH, DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH!

IT'S SO COMPLICATED NOW, I LOOKS LIKE A DISH OF SPAGHETTI.

AND JUST HOW DOES MR. BARCLAY

ENTER INTO THE LITIGATION?

HOW DO YOU SUPPOSE A CHARITABLE

ORGANIZATION CAN AFFORD THE SERVICES

OF AN EXPENSIVE LAWYER

LIKE MR. WHEELER?

ONLY BECAUSE MR. BARCLAY

PAYS THE BILLS.

AND WHY DOES MR. BARCLAY

PAY THE BILLS?

BECAUSE MR. BARCLAY WANTS TO BUY

THE GAYLORD HOUSE, TEAR IT DOWN,

AND ERECT IN ITS PLACE A

HIDEOUS MONUMENT TO HIS VANITY

TO BE KNOWN:

AS BARCLAY SQUARE.

AND WHY CAN'T MR. BARCLAY

BUY THE GAYLORD HOUSE?

BECAUSE IT'S NOT PART OF THE

ESTATE WHICH IS IN LITIGATION.

I GOT IT DIREC FROM MY GRANDMOTHER.

IT BELONGS TO ME... AND A

GAYLORD NEVER SELLS THE LAND.

YOUR HONOR,

IT EMBARRASSES ME

THAT A CLIENT OF MINE SHOULD

BE GUILTY OF SUCH MISCONDUCT,

PARTICULARLY:

IN YOUR HONOR'S COURT.

I CAN ONLY ASK YOUR HONOR'S

INDULGENCE ON THE GROUNDS

OF THE NERVOUS STRAIN TO

WHICH SHE'S BEEN SUBJECTED.

AND AS FOR MR. BARCLAY, EVEN

IF HE HAS ENGAGED MR. WHEELER

TO PROTECT HIS INTERES IN THE BOYS' CLUB,

WHY SHOULDN'T HE INTERES HIMSELF IN THIS CHARITY,

THE SAME AS HE HAS

IN SO MANY OTHERS?

TRIPE!

MISS FIONA!

DON'T WAVE

YOUR HANDS AT ME!

I WON'T SIT DOWN,

AND I WON'T KEEP STILL.

YOUR HONOR, FOR OVER 20 YEARS,

THIS MESS HAS BEEN GOING ON.

WE'VE PRACTICALLY

GROWN UP IN COURT.

I KNEW WHAT A SUBPOENA WAS

BEFORE I COULD SPELL "CAT."

THEY'VE WRITTEN BOOKS ABOUT THIS

CASE AND TEACH IT AT HARVARD.

IT'S AN ANNUAL

PERFORMANCE-

THE GAYLORD CIRCUS

IS COMING TO TOWN!

AND WHO PAYS FOR IT?

WE DO!

WE'VE BEEN LIVING ON OUR

EXPECTATIONS, BORROWING ON THEM...

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes