Court Opinion

ID: 9847976
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:10:48.030559+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:52.672447
License: Public Domain

Clarke, Presiding Justice,
dissenting.
I am unable to agree with the majority’s holding thát the evidence of the amount of pension payments was improperly excluded. I believe the time has come for Georgia to adopt the majority rule which authorizes a trial judge to exercise his discretion in excluding relevant evidence which has only slight probative value and which is outweighed by the risk that its admission will “(a) necessitate undue consumption of time, or (b) create substantial danger of undue *460prejudice or of confusing the issues or of misleading the jury, or (c) unfairly and harmfully surprise a party who has not had reasonable opportunity to anticipate that such evidence would be offered.” Agnor’s Georgia Evidence, Sec. 10-2. If this rule is followed in the case before us, the trial court would be affirmed and trial judges in future cases would have a better opportunity to see that justice is done.
Decided November 6, 1986
Reconsideration denied November 25, 1986.
Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General, Carl C. Jones, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Susan L. Rutherford, Assistant Attorney General, for appellants.
Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman & Ashmore, Alan E. Lubel, for appellee.
I am authorized to state that Justice Smith joins in this dissent.