Court Opinion

ID: 9856791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:57:43.226583+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:38.796787
License: Public Domain

Felton, Chief Judge,
concurring specially. I concur in the judgment and in Divisions 1 and 2 of the opinion. I concur in the ultimate conclusion in Division 3 that there was no genuine issue of fact for a jury but for a different reason. I think that the defendant’s testimony before the State Board of Workmen’s Compensation to the effect that “McCurry [was driving] as far as I know” (emphasis supplied) is inconsistent with his affidavit on summary judgment that McCurry was driving, and would have been sufficient to impeach the defendant’s testimony if proper groundwork had been laid for its consideration in this *104case. The defendant was not faced with his inconsistent statement by deposition or otherwise and until that was done' the matter in counter showing against the motion for a summary judgment insofar as the effort to impeach the defendant was concerned was not admissible in evidence as the record now stands and there is no legal showing that there was a genuine issue of fact to be decided by the jury.