Camelot Club Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Metro Lawns, Inc.

• Decision Date: 19 February 1982
• Docket Number: No. 62923,62923
• Parties: CAMELOT CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. v. METRO LAWNS, INC.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 325

288 S.E.2d 325

161 Ga.App. 574

CAMELOT CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. v. METRO LAWNS, INC.

No. 62923.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Feb. 19, 1982.

As Modified on Denial of Rehearing March 11, 1982.

Donald B. Kuperman, Philip S. Downer, Atlanta, for appellant.

Charles A. Wiley, Jr., Atlanta, for appellee.

DEEN, Presiding Judge.

1. Where opinion testimony is sought to be offered as that of an expert and is excluded by the trial court "the issue on appeal is not whether the trial judge was correct but whether he abused his discretion." Stancil v. State, 155 Ga.App. 731, 733, 272 S.E.2d 511 (1980). There are necessarily degrees of expertise, and the amount of formal education necessary to render one a medical expert, for example, is far different from that required to determine whether a lawn has been well cared for or trees and shrubbery properly pruned. "To qualify as an expert (see Code § 38-1710) generally all that is required is that a person must have been educated in a particular skill or profession; his special knowledge may be derived from experience as well as study. [Cit. omitted.] Formal education in the subject at hand is not a prerequisite for expert status." Bowden v. State, 239 Ga. 821, 826, 238 S.E.2d 905 (1977). Here the defendant attempted to elicit an opinion from its grounds supervisor as to the condition of the lawn and shrubbery when he was hired. The witness had been raised on a farm, had worked tending grounds for the state for seven years, had worked for private residential owners tending their lawns and shrubs, etc. He appeared unfamiliar with brand names and chemical formulae, but did appear to understand the job he was called upon to do and the proper method of going about it. The court, although stating that Mr. Dotson was the sort of fellow he would want to work in his own yard and "I expect if anybody could do it, he could" referring to grounds maintenance, held that he had not shown sufficient scientific background to qualify as a witness and therefore could not express an opinion as to whether immediately prior to the time he was hired the grounds had been neglected in various ways. Even a lay witness may give opinion testimony so long as he states facts on which the opinion is based. Spencer v. State, 236 Ga. 697, 700, 224 S.E.2d 910 (1976). This witness was prepared to go into detail as to the conditions he found and his actions in correcting them. Under the circumstances he should have been allowed to state his conclusions based thereon, the credence due them to be left to the jury.

2. A series of photographs of the grounds taken on April 29 was offered in evidence and refused on the ground that the period involved in the lawsuit was February and March. The witness stated that he was not familiar with the grounds in February but its appearance in March was very much as depicted. Work crews of the plaintiff did visit the property as late as April 12, and Camelot was not informed until April 24 that they did not intend to return. Under the circumstances it was error to exclude the photographs. It is the substantial...