Court Opinion

ID: 9567295
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:51:54.847086+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:00:31.333555
License: Public Domain

*684Eberhardt, Presiding Judge,
concurring specially. I concur in the judgment of reversal.
1. I agree that it was error to refuse the plaintiffs request to instruct on the provisions of Code Ann. § 68-1626 (a). The evidence was skimpy, but sufficient to make the request pertinent and proper. Without the request I would find no error as to the failure to charge this portion of the statute.
2. If, on a new trial, the court is to charge relative to Code Ann. § 68-1626 (c), the facts here would make it proper, if not a requisite, that in that connection the charge also include an instruction in line with our holding in Wells v. Alderman, 117 Ga. App. 724, 730 (162 SE2d 18), particularly referring to the last paragraph of Division 3 of that opinion.
In all other respects I am in full agreement with the majority opinion.