Opinion

Hoard v. Wiley

  • 113 Ga. App. 328
  • 147 S.E.2d 782
  • 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 1057
Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Filed
Mar 17, 1966
Status
Published
Author
Pannell
On the bench
Jordan, Hall, Eberhardt, Deen, Felton, Nichols, Frankum, Pannell, Bell
Cited by
104 cases

the right to open an automatic default within the 15-day period is expressly conditioned upon the payment of costs, and where defendant failed to comply with this condition, the trial court did not err in granting plaintiffs motion to strike defendant’s answer

How later courts described this case

  • the right to open an automatic default within the 15-day period is expressly conditioned upon the payment of costs, and where defendant failed to comply with this condition, the trial court did not err in granting plaintiffs motion to strike defendant’s answer
  • fair market value of beer and wine cannot be determined from purchase price alone but may be an element when coupled with other evidence such as condition at the time of purchase and loss
  • “when an opinion is sought from a witness as to the value of a thing, it is necessary that it be shown that the witness has some knowledge, experience or familiarity with the value of the thing or of similar things”
  • value is necessarily a matter of opinion, and such opinion is admissible as long as the witness provides the foundation underlying such opinion

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Pannell, Judge,

concurring specially. I concur in the judgment of reversal for the sole reason that the only testimony as to value (that of the plaintiff himself) did not demand, or authorize, the verdict directed, and this is true regardless of the cases discussed and of the various rules sponsored by the various opinions. The testimony of the plaintiff as to value was contradictory and equivocal, and construed most strongly against him did not authorize the verdict directed. It, therefore, is un *336 necessary to affirm or overrule any of the previous decisions of this court discussed and referred to in the opinion and relating to the probative value and. legal effect of opinion evidence, and I expressly dissent, for this reason, to the overruling of any of these decisions.

I am authorized to say that Felton, C. J., Nichols, P. J., and Frankum, J., join me in this special concurrence.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.