Hawes v. Red Oak Hauling Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hawes v. Red Oak Hauling Co.

157 S.E.2d 38, 116 Ga. App. 302, 1967 Ga. App. LEXIS 785

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 12, 1967

Docket42877

StatusPublished

This text of 157 S.E.2d 38 (Hawes v. Red Oak Hauling Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hawes v. Red Oak Hauling Co., 157 S.E.2d 38, 116 Ga. App. 302, 1967 Ga. App. LEXIS 785 (Ga. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Judge.

1. A tax fi. fa. was issued by the Commissioner of Revenue, under which a levy was made. The defendant filed an affidavit of illegality and the case came on for a hearing before the judge of the superior court. Prior, .to the time the plaintiff in fi. fa. closed his case, the judge entered an order Sustaining the affidavit of illegality and dismissed the levy. The judgment which was tantamount to the direction of a verdict in a jury trial, being entered prior to the close of the evidence, was error. Code § 110-104, as amended (Ga. L. 1961, p. 216); Wilson v. Kornegay, 108 Ga. App. 318, 321 (132 SE2d 791); Mallard v. Mallard, 221 Ga. 480 (145 SE2d 533).

2. The trial judge was correct in refusing to allow a witness for the plaintiff in fi. fa. to testify as to his examination of certain documents which were in the defendant’s possession since the documents themselves would have been the highest and best evidence. Code §§ 38-203 and 38-701. While the objection to the proffered evidence was that it was hearsay, the rule is well settled that although an objection was predicated on different grounds if the testimony was properly rejected, the ruling of the trial court will be sustained. Lamon v. Perry, 33 Ga. App. 248, 251 (125 SE 907) and cases cited. Williamson, Inman & Co. v. Thompson, 53 Ga. App. 821, 824 (4) (187 SE 194); Cox v. State, 93 Ga. App. 533, 535 (92 SE2d 260).

Judgment reversed.

Jordan, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Quillian, Judge.

1. A tax fi. fa. was issued by the Commissioner of Revenue, under which a levy was made. The defendant filed an affidavit of illegality and the case came on for a hearing before the judge of the superior court. Prior, .to the time the plaintiff in fi. fa. closed his case, the judge entered an order Sustaining the affidavit of illegality and dismissed the levy. The judgment which was tantamount to the direction of a verdict in a jury trial, being entered prior to the close of the evidence, was error. Code § 110-104, as amended (Ga. L. 1961, p. 216); Wilson v. Kornegay, 108 Ga. App. 318, 321 (132 SE2d 791); Mallard v. Mallard, 221 Ga. 480 (145 SE2d 533).

2. The trial judge was correct in refusing to allow a witness for the plaintiff in fi. fa. to testify as to his examination of certain documents which were in the defendant’s possession since the documents themselves would have been the highest and best evidence. Code §§ 38-203 and 38-701. While the objection to the proffered evidence was that it was hearsay, the rule is well settled that although an objection was predicated on different grounds if the testimony was properly rejected, the ruling of the trial court will be sustained. Lamon v. Perry, 33 Ga. App. 248, 251 (125 SE 907) and cases cited. Williamson, Inman & Co. v. Thompson, 53 Ga. App. 821, 824 (4) (187 SE 194); Cox v. State, 93 Ga. App. 533, 535 (92 SE2d 260).

Judgment reversed.

Jordan, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 S.E.2d 38, 116 Ga. App. 302, 1967 Ga. App. LEXIS 785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawes-v-red-oak-hauling-co-gactapp-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack