Court Opinion

ID: 9561563
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:12:04.29402+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:56.820874
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam.
Defendant appeals from an order overruling his motion for new trial in a personal injury suit. The trial court directed a verdict on the issue of liability and the jury returned a verdict of $10,000. He contends the trial court erred in overruling his motion for mistrial based upon the following statement made by the plaintiff’s attorney in his opening remarks to the jury: “. . . we will show that the defendant at that time made a statement to the *192lady, and insisted that she go to the doctor, that he stated that to her, that it was his fault — that his insurance company would take care of it for her. . .”
Argued November 5,1969
Decided January 28, 1970
Rehearing denied February 16, 1970
Bouhan, Williams & Levy, Frank W. Seiler, for appellant.
Austin, Pahno •& Herndon, Donald E. Austin, for appellee.
“Admissions against interest are such even though they may contain a suggestion that the party making them carries insurance, and the mere fact, that insurance, or an insurance company, is mentioned as an inextricable part of the statement made by such party or conversation in which he indulged, does not make the evidence inadmissible when offered by the opposite party.” Wade v. Drinkard, 76 Ga. App. 159 (5a) (45 SE2d 231); Hix v. Headrick, 97 Ga. App. 540 (103 SE2d 516). If the statement is admissible in evidence as an integral part of an admission, it necessarily follows that an attorney has the right to say in his opening statement that he expects to prove this admission.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall, P. J., Pannell and Quillian, JJ., concur.