Opinion ID: 1240022
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: undue emphasis upon certain testimony

Text: Appellant contends the trial judge abused his discretion by placing undue emphasis on the testimony of medical witnesses to the exclusion of lay testimony. While sitting as a jury the trial judge is the trier of the facts, and nothing in the record indicates an abuse of discretion. The medical testimony objected to by Appellant was clear, cogent and credible while the testimony relied upon by Appellant was presented by nieces and nephews who seldom visited Clara. Appellant's final contention that the trial judge abused his discretion by ascribing higher qualifications to Dr. Myers Hicks over Dr. Marion Carr is without merit. It is the duty of the trier of facts to evaluate witness testimony and assign to it such weight as he determines proper. Affirmed. LITTLEJOHN, C.J., and NESS, GREGORY and HARWELL, JJ., concur.