From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Truluck v. Funderburk

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 28, 1969
168 S.E.2d 657 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)

Summary

In Truluck v. Funderburk, 119 Ga. App. 734 (168 S.E.2d 657) the court questioned Jackson v. Tucker, 118 Ga. App. 693 (165 S.E.2d 466) where the grant of summary judgment to a defendant physician had been affirmed, and reversed the grant in the case under consideration because "the opinion testimony in the case sub judice would not be sufficient to authorize the granting of the defendant's motion for summary judgment."

Summary of this case from Anderson v. Crippen

Opinion

44324.

ARGUED MARCH 3, 1969.

DECIDED APRIL 28, 1969. REHEARING DENIED MAY 21, 1969.

Action for damages. Colquitt Superior Court. Before Judge Lilly.

Reinhardt, Ireland, Whitley Sims, Tyron Elliott, for appellant.

Twitty Twitty, Whelchel Whelchel, Hoyt H. Whelchel, Jr., for appellee.


This is an appeal from the granting of a summary judgment for the defendant in a malpractice case. The ultimate fact for determination is whether the defendant's services were performed in an ordinarily skillful manner. Ga. Northern R. Co. v. Ingram, 114 Ga. 639, 640 ( 40 S.E. 708). This question can only be decided, except in a few extreme circumstances, upon the expert opinion and testimony given by physicians. Shea v. Phillips, 213 Ga. 269 ( 98 S.E.2d 552).

"While opinion evidence is sufficient in a proper case to present a jury issue and thus preclude a summary judgment, yet the opinion testimony of the ultimate fact to be decided in the case is never sufficient to authorize the grant of a summary judgment." Harrison v. Tuggle, 225 Ga. 211 (2) ( 167 S.E.2d 395), and Ginn v. Morgan, 225 Ga. 192 ( 167 S.E.2d 393).

Under the holding in the Harrison case the opinion testimony in the case sub judice would not be sufficient to authorize the granting of the defendant's motion for summary judgment. Anything held to the contrary in Jackson v. Tucker, 118 Ga. App. 693 ( 165 S.E.2d 466), decided prior to the Harrison and Ginn cases, supra, must yield to those decisions.

Judgment reversed. Felton, C. J., and Pannell, J., concur.

ARGUED MARCH 3, 1969 — DECIDED APRIL 28, 1969 — REHEARING DENIED MAY 21, 1969 — CERT. APPLIED FOR.


Summaries of

Truluck v. Funderburk

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 28, 1969
168 S.E.2d 657 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)

In Truluck v. Funderburk, 119 Ga. App. 734 (168 S.E.2d 657) the court questioned Jackson v. Tucker, 118 Ga. App. 693 (165 S.E.2d 466) where the grant of summary judgment to a defendant physician had been affirmed, and reversed the grant in the case under consideration because "the opinion testimony in the case sub judice would not be sufficient to authorize the granting of the defendant's motion for summary judgment."

Summary of this case from Anderson v. Crippen
Case details for

Truluck v. Funderburk

Case Details

Full title:TRULUCK v. FUNDERBURK

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Apr 28, 1969

Citations

168 S.E.2d 657 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)
168 S.E.2d 657

Citing Cases

Rushing v. Ellis

We further note that where the proof offered by the defendants consists of medical opinion testimony, expert…

Anderson v. Crippen

The general rule is that since the jury is not bound by opinion testimony, this type of evidence may never…