Edge v. Fugatt

Lay witnesses may state their opinions based on their own observations.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Velveeta Edge and Sammie Durham sued John Fugatt and Longoria Trucking1 for damages incurred when Edge’s vehicle was allegedly forced off the road and into a ditch by a collision between a dump truck driven by Fugatt and a tractor trailer truck. After a trial, the jury returned a verdict for defendants Fugatt and Longoria Trucking. On appeal, plaintiffs Edge and Durham claim the trial court erred in i permitting cross-examination of Edge concerning her Social Security disability benefits, ii allowing cross-examination of Durham about the accident scene, and iii allowing witness William Patterson to give inadmissible hearsay testimony. We disagree and affirm. 1. Edge and Durham claim the trial court erroneously allowed Fugatt and Longoria Trucking to cross-examine Edge regarding her Social Security disability benefits. We disagree.

While cross-examining Edge, defendants’ attorney asked her, “Am I correct that you’re presently on Social Security disability” When Edge answered in the affirmative, her counsel objected. After a discussion off the record, the trial court asked the jury to leave the courtroom and then heard arguments from counsel as to whether Edge’s Social Security disability benefits were impermissible evidence of a collateral source. See Olariu v. Marrero , 248 Ga. App. 824, 825 549 SE2d 121 2001 Georgia law prohibits presentation to the jury of payment of damages by a collateral source physical precedent only. The trial court ultimately sustained the objection. Edge’s and Durham’s counsel asked for curative instructions, and the trial court charged the jury that they should not consider whether Edge received Social Security disability benefits. Edge’s and Durham’s counsel did not renew his objection or ask for a mistrial after the trial court gave the curative instructions. Accordingly, Edge and Durham acquiesced to the curative steps taken by the trial court and have waived the issue on appeal. See Sunflower Properties v. Yokum , 261 Ga. App. 142, 144 2 581 SE2d 648 2003.

Edge v. Fugatt

Lay witnesses may state their opinions based on their own observations.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report