Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.) entered July 30, 1990, after a jury trial and verdict in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, the complaint reinstated and the matter is remanded for a new trial upon both causes of action before another Justice, with costs to abide the event.
Moreover it also appears that the Trial Justice, whether or not provoked by counsel’s misconduct, "so far injected himself into the proceedings that the jury could not review the case in the calm and untrammelled spirit necessary to effect justice” (Kamen Soap Prods. Co. v Prusansky & Prusansky, 11 AD2d 676). Particularly, the fencing match indulged in by the court with plaintiffs expert witness, Dr. Lenchewski, as well as its unwarranted interventions repeated with virtually every other witness, could not have failed to impress upon the jury the court’s prevailing skepticism as to the merits of plaintiffs case, and the cumulative effect of this conduct rose to the level of reversible error (Siefring v Marion, 22 AD2d 765; Salzano v City of New York, 22 AD2d 656; Lopez v Linden Gen. Hosp., 89 AD2d 1010). Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Wallach and Ross, JJ.
