The order is based upon the uncorroborated testimony of the complainant, which, in general and blanket terms, accuses the defendant of frequent and numerous acts of intercourse over a period of six months. Complainant testified to no specific time or place, although counsel for defendant attempted to obtain a ruling that she should. Defendant admits two acts of intercourse with the complainant several months prior to the time of possible conception, and denies any act thereafter. On these two occasions he testified that contraceptives were used, which complainant admits. Complainant admits that she has had relations with other men; that during the period involved she was a frequenter of several taverns and associated therein and elsewhere with other men. It appears by complainant's own admission, let alone the other evidence in the case, that she was promiscuous and of such a character that her credibility is subject to the closest scrutiny. The evidence in the record falls far short of the standards required in cases of this type. ( Commissioner of Public Welfare of City of N.Y. v. Kotel, 256 App. Div. 352; People v. Ruggiero, 275 App. Div. 726; Phillips v. Tagliavini, 275 App. Div. 103 7; People v. Makin, 275 App. Div. 1050.) Order reversed, on the law and facts, and the proceeding dismissed, without costs. Foster, P.J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ., concur.