Opinion
February 8, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Robert E. Fischer, J.).
Insofar as pertinent, the action was brought to recover a loan acknowledged by defendant in a letter that defendant claims was forged. The trial court, however, crediting plaintiff's handwriting expert, found defendant's signature on the letter to be genuine, a finding which we see no reason to disturb. It was not reversible error to permit plaintiff's expert to remain in the courtroom during the testimony of defendant's expert (People v Felder, 39 A.D.2d 373, 379-380, affd 32 N.Y.2d 747, appeal dismissed 414 U.S. 948). Nor was it reversible error to allow plaintiff to impeach defendant by eliciting on cross-examination the disciplinary proceedings that had been brought against him (CPLR 4513; see, People v Lee, 35 A.D.2d 542 [impeachment of defendant by showing dishonorable discharge from Army after court-martial held proper]). Finally, defendant's argument that plaintiff was required to show, as part of its prima facie case, that delivery of the letter in question to plaintiff was authorized by defendant (citing UCC 3-306 [c]) was not raised at trial and therefore may not be considered on appeal.
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Milonas, Asch, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.