The court interrupted the inquiry, warning counsel that he was close to eliciting the very information he sought to preclude and urging that counsel refrain from further reference to the Town's attorney. Thus, when counsel continued to question the witness as to the source of his information, he did so at his own peril and cannot now complain of error ( e.g. People v German, 52 AD3d 343, 344; People v McFadden, 261 AD2d 419; People v Rodriguez, 224 AD2d 346). In any event, as the witness neither identified the parties to the suit nor revealed anything of its nature ( see People v Ahmad, 20 Misc 3d 134[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 51481[U] [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists 2008]), an inference of actual prejudice would be purely speculative.