
    LASSIG v. BARSKY.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    March 24, 1904.)
    1. Conduct of Counsel—Reversible Error.
    Conveying to the jurors, in an action for personal injuries, under the guise of inquiring into their qualifications, and in' the cross-examination of a witness for defendant, the information that defendant was insured against loss in case of a recovery against him, constitutes reversible error.
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
    Action by Mollie Lassig, an infant, against Joseph Barsky. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
    Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and SCOTT and BLANCHARD, JJ.
    Frank V. Johnson, for appellant.
    A. Oberstein, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

In view of the information conveyed by plaintiff’s counsel to the jurors, under the guise of inquiring into their qualifications, that the defendant was insured against loss in the event of a recovery against him, and a repetition of this reprehensible practice in the course of the cross-examination of one of defendant’s witnesses, the judgment and order appealed from should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. This disposition is called for by the decisions of Wildrick v. Moore, 66 Hun, 630, 22 N. Y. Supp. 1119; Manigold v. Black River Traction Co., 81 App. Div. 381, 80 N. Y. Supp. 861; Cosselmon v. Dunfee, 172 N. Y. 507, 65 N. E. 494; Lipschutz v. Ross (Sup.) 84 N. Y. Supp. 632.

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