
    E. Carl Schnabel, Appellant, v. The American Educational Alliance, Respondent.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    March, 1913.)
    Contracts — of employment — agreement to pay fifty dollars a week absolutely.
    Depositions — read on trial — exclusion of cross-examination.
    A contract of employment by which plaintiff had a “ drawing account of fifty dollars per week against commission at a fixed rate,” etc., is an agreement to pay fifty dollars a week absolutely.
    After the direct testimony of plaintiff taken by deposition has been read on the trial, it is reversible error to exclude his cross-examination because defendant declines to read the answers.
    Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Mew York, borough of Manhattan, fourth district, rendered in favor of the defendant after a trial by a judge without a jury.
    Edward K. Sumerwell, for appellant.
    Thomas P. McKenna, for respondent.
   Bijur, J.

This judgment seems to have been rendered on the theory that a contract of employment which gave the plaintiff a “ drawing account of fifty dollars per week against commission at a fixed rate, etc.,” was not an agreement to pay fifty dollars per week absolutely, but only conditioned on the securing of orders. In this the learned court was in error. Schlesinger v. Burland, 42 Misc. Rep. 206.

The exclusion of the so-called cross-examination of the plaintiff in a deposition, because the defendant declined to read the answers and plaintiff’s counsel thereupon offered to read them, also constituted reversible error. Kalkhoff Co. v. Russian Church, 67 Misc. Rep. 107.

Seabuey and Gebabd, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.  