Court Opinion

ID: 9563524
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:41:02.377901+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:53.728637
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Objections to hypothetical questions on the ground that they assume facts not in evidence must be timely made in order for the question to be excluded. Ellis v. Southern R. Co., 89 Ga. App. 407 (79 SE2d 541). Certain of the hypothetical questions appearing in Dr. Frankel’s deposition assumed codeine had been administered every four hours, which error was called to his attention later in the deposition and he reaffirmed the opinion after consulting the hospital records-that the administration of five doses in one day, as shown by the hospital records, “should have alerted somebody.” Other hypothetical questions not including facts regarding drug administration, in the opinion of the witness, revealed negligence in the application of the cast prior to any question of follow-up observation. It therefore appears that the fact erroneously assumed, which was corrected later in the deposition, which originally infected some but not all of the questions asked, is not of itself a sufficient reason for *524disallowing the entire deposition, particularly when no specific objection was urged before the trial court.