Court Opinion

ID: 9567222
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:50:58.20569+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:00:27.000364
License: Public Domain

Evans, Judge,
concurring specially. 1. In Division 1 of the opinion, plaintiffs objections to the state highway patrolman’s evidence are discussed. The patrolman testified in major part from a memorandum or writing *446previously made. But he remembered, without the aid of the writing, as to the damages to the cars, and as to the debris and trash that fell in the highway at the scene of the collision. Plaintiff moved to strike the whole of the testimony of the patrolman. In Robertson v. Cox, 183 Ga. 744 (4) (189 SE 844), it is held that an objection en bloc to the entire testimony, some part of which is admissible, is not a proper objection. The majority opinion correctly holds the testimony was admissible, although placing its reason on other legal principles.
2. Other than here noted, I concur in the majority opinion and judgment.