Court Opinion

ID: 9605211
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:31:49.877734+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:55.470293
License: Public Domain

Quillian, Presiding Judge,
dissenting.
I agree with the opinion that request to charge 6 was not authorized and the trial judge did not err in failing to give such charge. However, I cannot agree that it was error to fail to charge the law of accord and satisfaction. The record reveals that the appellant objected to the failure to give request to charge 6, but no objection was made with regard to the charge as given or the failure to charge the law of accord and satisfaction. Code Ann. § 70-207 (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18,31; as amended through Ga. L. 1968, pp. 1072,1078) provides: "No party may complain of the giving or the failure to give an instruction to the jury, unless he objects thereto before the jury returns its verdict, stating distinctly the matter to which he objects and the grounds of his objection.”
Shulman, J., joins in this dissent.