Crooke v. Elliott
| Decision Date | 09 September 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 36815,No. 1,36815,1 |
| Citation | 96 Ga.App. 314,99 S.E.2d 842 |
| Parties | Mrs. A. C. CROOKE v. M. F. ELLIOTT |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Under the Act of 1952 (Ga.L. 1952, p. 177; Code Ann. § 38-711), the evidence objected to in the first special ground of the amended motion for new trial was admissible in evidence as a record made in the regular course of the plaintiff's business.
2. A receipt given by a merchant showing that a purchaser's account is 'paid in full' up to a certain date is prima facie evidence that such account was 'paid in full' up to such date, but this presumption may be rebutted by satisfactory evidence that an item was left out by accident or mistake.
M. F. Elliott, trading as M. F. Elliott Lumber Company, brought the present action against the now Mrs. A. C. Crooke to recover an alleged balance due on an open account. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff which was made the judgment of the trial court. The defendant filed a motion for new trial on the general grounds which she later amended so as to assign error on the admission of certain evidence. The amended motion for new trial was denied and the defendant excepts.
Bobby B. Mitchell, Thomaston, W. B. Mitchell, Forsyth, for plaintiff in error.
Dickson Adams, W. M. Dallas and John E. Holliman, Thomaston, for defendant in error.
1. The one special ground of the amended motion for new trial complains that the trial court erred in admitting in evidence over objection in the plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1 which was an invoice for 17,543 board feet of lumber and the memorandum delivery tickets on such lumber. The grounds of objection urged on the trial were that such exhibit was hearsay and was not made in the regular course of business inasmuch as the plaintiff's testimony showed that the exhibit was lost for some 8 months.
On the trial the plaintiff testified in part, with reference to the invoice and delivery tickets which comprised the exhibit objected to: The Act of 1952 (Ga.L. 1952, p. 177; Code Ann. § 38-711), reads in part: 'Any writing or record, whether in the form of an entry in a book or otherwise, made as a memorandum or record of any act, transaction, occurrence or event shall be admissible in evidence in proof of said act, transaction, occurrence or event, if the trial judge shall find that it was made in the regular course of any business, and that it was the regular course of such business to make such memorandum or record at the time of such act, transaction, occurrence or event or within a reasonable time thereafter. All other circumstances of the making of such writing or record, including lack of personal knowledge by the entrant or maker, may be shown to affect its weight, but they shall not affect its admissibility. The term ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Benn v. McBride
...225(1), 207 S.E.2d 701 (1974); Daniel v. Dixie Plumbing Supply Co., 112 Ga.App. 427(2), 145 S.E.2d 796 (1965); Crooke v. Elliott, 96 Ga.App. 314(1), 99 S.E.2d 842 (1957). 3. Code Ann. § 67-2002(2) (Ga.L.1967, p. 456) requires as a necessary incident to the perfection of a materialman's lien......
-
Ricketts v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
...Ann. §§ 38-710 and 38-711 were satisfied, so the documents were admissible. Smith v. Smith, 224 Ga. 442, 162 S.E.2d 379; Crooke v. Elliott, 96 Ga.App. 314, 99 S.E.2d 842; Williams v. American Surety Co., 83 Ga.App. 66, 62 S.E.2d 673. See also Guthrie v. Berrien Products Co., 91 Ga.App. 45, ......
-
Zanac, Inc. v. Frazier Neon Signs, Inc.
...an exception to the hearsay rule. See, e.g., Daniel v. Dixie Plumbing Supply Co., 112 Ga.App. 427(2), 145 S.E.2d 796; Crooke v. Elliott, 96 Ga.App. 314(1), 99 S.E.2d 842. Code § 38-310 is no longer applicable to this type of evidence in spite of appellant's plea to revive it. See 11 E.G.L.,......
- Southern Ry. Co. v. Thompson