
    HAUPTMANN v. NEW YORK EDISON CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    January 30, 1914.)
    Tbial (§ 57*)—Reception op Evidence. In a personal injury case, the action of the court in restricting the number of witnesses of the accident, whom defendant could call to testify to the main issue was error.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Trial, Cent. Dig. §§ 133-136; Dec. Dig. § 57.*]
    Appeal from Trial Term, New York County.
    Action by Mayer Hauptmann, administrator, against the New York Edison Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, LAUGH-LIN, DOWLING, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.
    Thomas H. Beardsley, of New York City, for appellant.
    John F. McIntyre, of New York City, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The action of the court in restricting the number of witnesses whom the defendant should call to disprove the plaintiff’s cause of action was without justification. The defendant had a right to call as many persons who were witnesses to the accident as could testify to the main issue involved which was to be submitted to the jury.

The judgment and order are therefore reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.  