Parker v. Knight
| Decision Date | 20 May 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 35860,35860 |
| Citation | 245 Ga. 782,267 S.E.2d 222 |
| Parties | PARKER v. KNIGHT. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Sidney L. Cottingham, Douglas, for appellant.
Ben B. Mills, Jr., Fitzgerald, for appellee.
Where the defendant in a medical malpractice suit files a motion for summary judgment, introducing his own affidavit as an expert witness in support thereof, and the plaintiff fails to oppose the defendant's motion for summary judgment by introducing her own expert evidence, should the defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted? In this case, the Court of Appeals, 152 Ga.App. 467, 263 S.E.2d 248, held that under these circumstances the defendant-physician's motion for summary judgment should not be granted, because his testimony as an expert is insufficient to pierce the allegations of the plaintiff's pleadings. We disagree.
1. In Howard v. Walker, 242 Ga. 406, 408, 249 S.E.2d 45, 46-47 (1978), we held that, Withrow Timber Co. v. Blackburn, 244 Ga. 549, 552, 261 S.E.2d 361, 363 (1979).
2. In medical malpractice cases, the plaintiff must produce expert testimony in order to prevail at trial, unless actionable negligence clearly appears from other evidence. Shea v. Phillips, 213 Ga. 269(2), 98 S.E.2d 552 (1957). (Actionable negligence does not appear from other evidence in this case.)
3. For the past 114 years, parties to a suit have not been incompetent to testify in their own behalf in this state. See Ga.L.1866, pp. 138, 139, presently codified at Code § 38-1603. Code § 38-1603 states that no person offered as a witness shall be excluded by reason of being a party, except as provided therein. The exceptions provided in Code § 38-1603 are intended to be exhaustive. Lawson v. Prosser, 146 Ga. 421(1), 91 S.E. 469 (1917) and cits. Nowhere does Code § 38-1603 state that defendants in medical malpractice suits are incompetent to testify in their own behalf unless their testimony is corroborated. This is in essence what the Court of Appeals has held here, and we think that this holding flies in the face of Code § 38-1603.
We conclude that under Howard v. Walker, supra, the trial court was correct in granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment.
4. Where the plaintiff in a medical malpractice suit is unable to present the affidavit of an expert witness on motion for summary judgment, Code Ann. § 81A-156(f) (CPA § 56(f)) authorizes the plaintiff to execute an affidavit to this effect and the court may, among other things, order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained. See Mead Corp. v. Masterack, 243 Ga. 213, 253 S.E.2d 164 (1979).
In this case, the plaintiff did seek to invoke CPA § 56(f) by her attorney's filing an affidavit in which he avers that he has been unable to obtain an affidavit opposing the defendant's motion for summary judgment because he has been unable to secure the plaintiff's medical records from her former physician. However, this CPA § 56(f) affidavit was not served on the defendant until the day of the summary judgment hearing and was, therefore, untimely under Code Ann. § 81A-156(c), which requires affidavits in opposition to a motion for summary judgment to be served on the adverse party prior to the day of the hearing. Since this affidavit was not served in a timely fashion, we are unable to say that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to delay the grant of the defendant's motion for summary judgment. See Gunter v. Nat. City Bank, 239...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sullivan v. Henry
...evidence in the opposing medical expert's affidavit. Therefore, based upon Howard v. Walker, 242 Ga. 406, 249 S.E.2d 45; Parker v. Knight, 245 Ga. 782, 267 S.E.2d 222; Payne v. Golden, 245 Ga. 784, 267 S.E.2d 211; and Skinner v. Coleman-Nincic Urology Clinic, 156 Ga.App. 638, 275 S.E.2d 724......
-
Johnson v. Jones, s. 71536
...upon which the Court may grant summary judgment in favor of the physician/defendant. Payne v. Golden, 245 Ga. 784 (1980); Parker v. Knight, 245 Ga. 782 (1980). ... Dr. Umberhandt's affidavit clearly states his opinion that in his care and treatment of the plaintiff, his actions were in acco......
-
Landers v. Georgia Baptist Medical Center
...552. A defendant-doctor is competent to give his opinion as an expert in a medical malpractice action against him. Parker v. Knight, 245 Ga. 782(3), 267 S.E.2d 222. Such expert testimony, the same as any other expert testimony on the same issue, can be sufficient to pierce the pleadings of ......
-
Rogers v. Norvell
...present an affidavit on his behalf as to the applicable standard of conduct and whether his actions met that standard. Parker v. Knight, 245 Ga. 782(3), 267 S.E.2d 222; Rose v. Rollins, 167 Ga.App. 469, 471, 306 S.E.2d 724. The trial court properly considered the affidavit of the 2. Plainti......