Opinion
Docket No. 10253.
Decided January 24, 1972.
Appeal from Wayne, Joseph G. Rashid, J. Submitted Division 1 January 5, 1972, at Detroit. (Docket No. 10253.) Decided January 24, 1972.
Complaint by Fred Turfe against Thomas Intihar for negligence. Judgment for plaintiff. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Lopatin, Miller, Bindes, Tanielian Freedman ( Norman L. Zemke, of counsel), for plaintiff.
Davidson, Gotshall, Kohl, Nelson, Secrest, Wardle Lynch, for defendant.
Before: LEVIN, P.J., and HOLBROOK and BRONSON, JJ.
Plaintiff, Fred Turfe, received a jury judgment for $818.50 against defendant, Thomas Intihar, in an automobile negligence action.
On appeal plaintiff raises the issue that the trial court abused its discretion by restricting plaintiff's rebuttal medical testimony. We find that the proffered rebuttal testimony could have been offered in plaintiff's main case.
It is the general rule that whether evidence which could have been offered before resting may be given in rebuttal is a matter within the discretion of the trial court. An examination of the record does not demonstrate any abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court. People v. Finnister, 33 Mich. App. 283 (1971); Lexchin v. Mathews, 269 Mich. 120 (1934); People v. Utter, 217 Mich. 74 (1921); and Beebe v. Koshnic, 55 Mich. 604 (1885).
Affirmed.