Baldwin v. Walker, 54217
| Citation | 238 S.E.2d 695,143 Ga.App. 382 |
| Decision Date | 07 September 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 54217,No. 1,54217,1 |
| Parties | Barbara C. BALDWIN et al. v. W. W. WALKER et al |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals (Georgia) |
Shelfer & Shelfer, William S. Shelfer, Jr., Decatur, for appellants.
N. Forrest Montet, Malcolm P. Smith, Atlanta, for appellees.
Michael Lee Baldwin, ten years of age, was fatally injured when struck by a pickup truck driven by defendant, William Wesley Walker. At the time Walker was acting within the scope of his duties as an employee of defendant S. & W. Service, Inc. Mrs. Barbara C. Baldwin, mother of the decedent, brought her action for damages for the wrongful death of her son, and her husband, Frank B. Baldwin, sought damages for deprivation of services of the child and certain hospital and funeral expenses. The actions were consolidated for trial and the jury returned a verdict in favor of defendants in both actions. The plaintiffs filed motions for new trial which were denied and they appeal. Held:
1. Defendant William Wesley Walker testified that he did not see the decedent prior to the collision. There were no other witnesses to the collision. An investigation was conducted by a Gwinnett County police officer who testified he had no way of determining whether the child was standing or riding his bicycle at the time of the collision, and that he did not know precisely what the child was doing when the collision occurred. His testimony as to physical facts at the scene did not disclose any knowledge in this regard. Therefore, it was error to allow this officer to testify regarding his opinion as to whether the accident would have happened if the Baldwin child had stopped and yielded the right of way before entering the street upon which the accident occurred. No evidence was presented by any witness that the child did not in fact stop and carefully begin to cross the street before being struck by defendant's vehicle. This question and answer invaded the province of the jury. Even an expert witness is not permitted to give his opinion in answer to a hypothetical question based on facts not placed in evidence by other witnesses or on which the expert has presumed knowledge. See in this regard Braswell v. Owen of Georgia, Inc., 128 Ga.App. 528(2), 197 S.E.2d 463; Ellis v. Southern Railway Co., 89 Ga.App. 407(1), 79 S.E.2d 541.
2. The investigating police officer testified that the accident occurred in Gwinnett County a short distance outside the city limits of Lawrenceville and that there were no speed limit signs in that area. The court then allowed the police officer to testify over objection that the legal speed limit at the place where the collision occurred was 55 miles per hour. The plaintiffs contend that the court improperly allowed the witness to express a conclusion of law and that the speed limit on that street was a question to be determined by the jury under appropriate instructions from ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Overstreet v. Nickelsen
...was harmful error in this case, "for it gave the [appellees] another defense to which they were not entitled." Baldwin v. Walker, 143 Ga.App. 382, 384(3), 238 S.E.2d 695 (1977). See also Rothrock v. Martin, 138 Ga.App. 16(1), 225 S.E.2d 489 (1976); Pace v. Foster, 150 Ga.App. 895, 896(1), 2......
-
Bowers v. State, 59455
...R. Co., 89 Ga.App. 407(1), 411, 79 S.E.2d 541; Ga. Power Co. v. Crutchfield, 125 Ga.App. 488, 489(3), 188 S.E.2d 140; Baldwin v. Walker, 143 Ga.App. 382(1), 238 S.E.2d 695; Bryant v. State, 197 Ga. 641, 642(6), 652, 30 S.E.2d 259; Braswell v. Owen of Ga., 128 Ga.App. 528, 529(2), 197 S.E.2d......
-
Green v. Knight
...emergency placed an undue burden upon appellants. They are entitled to a new trial as to appellee Knight. See Baldwin v. Walker, 143 Ga.App. 382, 384, 238 S.E.2d 695 (1977). Judgment affirmed in part; reversed in QUILLIAN, P. J., and BIRDSONG, J., concur. ...
-
American Aluminum Products Co., Inc. v. Binswanger Glass Co.
...not show how it was harmed by admission of the deposition. An appellant must demonstrate harm as well as error. Baldwin v. Walker, 143 Ga.App. 382, 384(2), 238 S.E.2d 695 (1977). CASE NO. "The owner of a commercial account may charge interest on that portion of a commercial account which ha......