Evidence of negligence or the lack of it as shown by what a party has done on other occasions or what he would do on other occasions with the benefit of hindsight lies in that twilight zone of judicial rulings sometimes held discretionary, sometimes harmless (or harmful) error, and sometimes admissible under the specific facts of the case. Nor was it error to allow the witness to testify, as to a street-light wire running over the same poles, that 'this particular one comes on through a photo-electric control * * * the light doesn't come on 'til dark,' over the objection that the witness was not shown to have personal knowledge of the fact, where it was followed by a specific statement that the wire in question was controlled by a photo-electric cell which allowed the 'juice' to flow through only during hours of darkness.ģ. A dragnet objection to evidence, part or most of which is admissible, is too general for consideration. A motion at the close of the witness' testimony to exclude all of his evidence, most of which consisted of answers to fact questions coming within the ambit of his employment, was properly overruled. Where a witness for the defendant testified that he had been general line superintendent with the company for 24 years and that it was his duty to know when changes were made in the lines, he demonstrated sufficient knowledge of the subject matter to be questioned on the stringing, layout and capacity of the electric lines over the houses where the plaintiff was injured. Where opposing counsel stated matter contended to be prejudicial to the plaintiff's case as reflecting on the character of his witnesses, a rejoinder, that he 'is going to ask the jury to deny this boy justice on the basis of something his mother did' and 'He's simply trying to prejudice this jury, Your Honor' without invoking a ruling of the court on the admissibility of the evidence or the propriety of the question or statement presents nothing for review.Ģ. The same is true as to remarks of counsel as to his reasons for asking certain questions. 'Where no final ruling as to the admissibility of the evidence is invoked in the trial court, no question for decision is presented to the reviewing court. Willoughby, Homerville, Young, Young & Ellerbee, Cam U. Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division Nos. SLASH PINE ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |