
    George Hethier, Respondent, v. Franklin Johns, Appellant.
    
      Evidence — when testimony of physician improperly excluded.
    
    
      Hethier v. Johns, 198 App. Div. 127, reversed.
    (Argued May 3, 1922;
    decided May 12, 1922.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered July 5, 1921, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The action was to recover for loss of services and expense occasioned plaintiff by reason of personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by his wife through the negligence of defendant. The question on appeal was whether testimony of & physician, consulted by plaintiff’s wife, offered on behalf of defendant, was properly excluded under section 834 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
    
      
      Frederick T. Pierson for appellant.
    
      William MacFarlane for respondent.
   Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event, on authority of Hethier v. Johns (233 N. Y. 370).

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.  