¶2
With regret, I concur in the result. In the interrogation of defendant, plaintiffs’ counsel resorted to flagrant misconduct. It
*563
is only because the then attorney for defendant (there has since been a substitution for him) failed to save the record by proper ■exception that a new trial is not justified.
¶3
As to the amount of the verdict, the fact that the jury may well have considered the case one for punitive damages is enough bo justify affirmance.
