Can a party call evidence to contradict a witness at cross-examination under the collateral fact rule?

As I noted above, the collateral fact rule does not ordinarily prevent a party from calling evidence to contradict a witness where a party seeks to adduce evidence of previous misconduct to prove the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue, and not solely for the purpose of attacking a witness's credibility. Where that is done, the evidence must be put to the witness during cross-examination because of the rule in Browne v. Dunne, in order to allow the witness an opportunity to address it. If the evidence is not admitted, the cross-examiner may usually go on to call contradictory evidence. However, with certain exceptions, there is a general prohibition against the use of evidence of character to circumstantially prove a fact in issue in a civil case.[8]