Seidemann: Two rings to unite them all

Posted

From the other side of the bench

by David Seidemann

Issue of April 30, 2010/ 16 Iyar, 5770

One of the most effective tools of cross-examination is to confront the witness with his or her testimony from a prior proceeding or act of life. For instance, I once cross examined a witness in a divorce case with testimony from a deposition she had given two years prior, relative to a motor vehicle accident that she was involved in for which he was claiming compensation for serious injuries.

At the divorce trial she was attempting to establish that her husband was the driving force behind their business and that he was the key to all the money made over the years. Her objective was to convince the court that now that they were becoming divorced she needed to be supported by her soon-to-be ex-husband because she possessed no business acumen herself. However, two years earlier a deposition given in connection to her motor vehicle accident she claimed just the opposite. She testified that she was the power behind the family business and that due to her injuries she was unable to work on a daily basis for months which served to cause the business to fold.

In another matrimonial case I confronted a man who claimed that he did not have the money to pay child support and spousal support with the fact that he made a contribution that year to the ASPCA. My point was well-received that he somehow had money to better the life of a dog but did not have enough money to see to it that his ex-wife and children have food to eat.

Deeds matter and words matter. Sometimes they come back to haunt you and sometimes they serve to help you. Here’s a story I heard about a week ago from the subject of the story herself as she lives modestly in our very own neighborhood.

The woman hailed from a very noteworthy family where each of the women in the family married into other noteworthy families. The mother married royalty as did her two daughters and granddaughter. The matriarch of the family lived in Israel with her husband and their eldest daughter. The younger daughter lived in the United States with her daughter, the granddaughter of the matriarch.

One summer afternoon at a family picnic the granddaughter misplaced her diamond engagement ring. She was a woman of simple tastes and never dreamed of having it replaced. She concealed the loss for as long as possible from her husband as she did not want her husband to feel the pressure of having to replace it.

Husbands can sometimes be fooled but mothers can’t, at least not as easily. One day the mother confronted her daughter and told her that she no longer believed her story that the ring was being polished and would soon “reoccupy her finger.”

“I know you misplaced it,” said her mother “I’m giving you mine... Tsu pas nisht. It is not proper that a woman as important and respected as you, married to such an important figure in our community should walk around without a ring on her finger. My husband, your father, passed away many years ago. I am no longer a married woman and I don’t need a diamond on my hand. You, however, deserve to walk the streets with the pride associated with being married and with the glory you deserve.” Reluctantly, her daughter took the ring and wore it on her finger for years. The secret between mother and daughter remained intact.

Meanwhile, across the great ocean, the matriarch of the family had taken ill and was being cared for on a daily basis by her elder daughter who lived just a short few blocks from her. “You have been such a great daughter, taking care of all my daily needs. When G-d decides that my time on this earth is over I am leaving to you my diamond engagement ring,” the great matriarch said.

That was the one and only discussion that took place regarding the ring and the subject was never resurrected until recently, when the matriarch of the family passed away.

After shiva concluded, the two daughters were cleaning out their mother’s bedroom drawers when they came upon their mother’s engagement ring. The daughter who lived in America, the one without a husband, the one who had given her diamond ring to her daughter told her sister: “While I was thousands of miles away in the United States you cared for our mother’s every need. I know she wanted you to have her diamond engagement ring and so here it is. We must carry out our mothers expressed wish.”

Using the same Yiddish phrase she used years before in addressing her daughter in America, she now addressed her older sister and said “Tsu pas nisht. It would be improper if we did not carry out our mother’s wish. So here please take the ring and wear it in good health.”

“I would in a heartbeat” said the elder sister, “but I am married and already have a diamond adorning my hand. You, on the other hand, though having lost your husband years ago, seem to have also lost the diamond ring he gave you upon your engagement.” Echoing her younger sister’s words it was her turn to say, “Tsu pas nisht. It would be improper for me to own two diamonds when you possess none.” And with that she gave their mother’s diamond ring to her younger sister.

“You see I knew your sparkling little secret,” the elder sister continued. “I knew that you said ‘Tsu pas nisht’ to your daughter, my niece, years ago when you gave your ring to her, sacrificing your honor for hers. Now it’s my turn to happily throw those words back in your face. Because it is so fitting that all of us, those with husbands and without, carry the majestic symbol of the love we shared with our respective and respected husbands.”

This is not just a “story “ I heard. I happen to have met every one of the women connected to this true story and know that the sparkle and radiance on their fingers are a reflection of their mothers and grandmother’s soul.

David Seidemann is a partner with the law firm of Seidemann & Mermelstein. He can be reached at (718) 692-1013 and at ds@lawofficesm.com