We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 977
Mr. McCann. I think both of us are wrong on what he said, but I think we both know what he meant.
Mr. Chairman, at this time we will return to the witnesses who were testifying yesterday.
Mr. Price. May I make one more statement, Mr. Chairman? . Counsel called my attention to the fact that the name Price appears in these notes as being present at the meeting of August 22. I want to explain that is Byron Price, not Peery Price.
Mr. Kearns. So understood, Mr. Price.
Mr. McCann. Mr. Dumont.
Proceed, Mr. Dumont.
'J
TESTIMONY OF JACK DUMONT— Recalled
Mr. Kearns. Mr. Dumont, Mr. Luddy was not here, and I would not permit you to continue with a statement you had started.
Mr. Dumont. I believe Mr. Luddy referred to — that is, he protested the court case showing we were not qualified. Mr. Luddy was never at the trial, does not know one bit of the testimony. One of the lawyers out of his office handled the case.
Mr. Kearns. That is in the firm. We couldn't question that.
Mr. Dumont. I mean, he referred to the testimony
Mr. Kearns. Law firms have many lawyers lots of times.
Mr. McCann. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if at this time we should proceed with Mr. Dumont or whether you would prefer at this particular moment to have Pat Casey answer the $64 question.
Mr. IvEARNS. "We will proceed at the moment.
Mr. McCann. Mr. Dumont, yesterday you were testifying with respect to the qualifications of your group, and I hold in my hand the answer of the defendants RKO-Radio Pictures, Inc. ; Columbia Pictures Corp. ; Loew's Inc. ; Paramount Pictures, Inc. ; Republic Productions, Inc. ; Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. ; Universal Co., Inc. ; and Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., for themselves alone and not for any other defendants, and answer the complaint herein as follows :
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to read paragraph V of the answer of these companies.
Answering paragraph V, admit that plaintiff and several other holders of temporary permits issued by local 706 have been employed from time to time by these answering defendants oyer a period of time commencing prior to the past 2 years ; and that those so employed over that period of time are sufficiently skilled to perform the diities required of them in their employment.
In order to set the date, I want to state this was filed on the 19th of December 1946. So it shows that it goes back 2 years or more beyond that.
Reading paragraph VI, the defendants stated :
Answering paragraph VI, admit that plaintiff and certain others among the persons employed as make-up artists who are sometimes referred to as auxiliary men, are qualified to perform the duties for which they have been employed ; admit that the members of the defendant local 706 are qualified to perform the duties for which they are employed.
Now, here is the answer of the defendant, Vanguard Films, Inc., to plaintiff's comj)laint, reading from paragraph III, it states :
Answering paragraph V, denies that plaintiff has at any time been employed by this answering defendant.
67383 — 48— vol. 1 63