Royal Indemnity Company v. Babb

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Royal Indemnity Company v. Babb

16 S.E.2d 907, 66 Ga. App. 51, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 112

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 14, 1941

Docket29194.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 16 S.E.2d 907 (Royal Indemnity Company v. Babb) 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

Royal Indemnity Company v. Babb, 16 S.E.2d 907, 66 Ga. App. 51, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 112 (Ga. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Gardner, J.

1. While it is not competent for a claimant testifying as to the change in condition of an injured member, for the purpose of showing an increase in permanent partial industrial handicap, to state that in her opinion such changed condition of injury is permanent (Atlanta Street Railroad Co. v. Walker, 93 Ga. 462 (2) 21 S. E. 48), nevertheless she may state the facts relatively to such condition, and from such facts, together with the remaining evidence, the director or board may determine the question of permanency.

2. Notwithstanding the testimony of a witness in a subsequent hearing is the same as to maximum percentage of industrial handicap as that given on a former hearing, when the director based the award on other testimony showing a lower percentage, such testimony is not incompetent, when taken in proper relation to all evidence in the ease, to establish a greater percentage on the subsequent hearing on a claim of change of condition.

3. The evidence was sufficient to support the award based on a change in condition showing an,increase of 8-1/3 per cent, in permanent, partial, industrial handicap, and this court is powerless to interfere. Smith v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 63 Ga. App. 898, 899 (12 S. E. 2d, 366). The superior court did not err in affirming the award of the board approving the findings of the director.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., ooneur.

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

Gardner, J.

1. While it is not competent for a claimant testifying as to the change in condition of an injured member, for the purpose of showing an increase in permanent partial industrial handicap, to state that in her opinion such changed condition of injury is permanent (Atlanta Street Railroad Co. v. Walker, 93 Ga. 462 (2) 21 S. E. 48), nevertheless she may state the facts relatively to such condition, and from such facts, together with the remaining evidence, the director or board may determine the question of permanency.

2. Notwithstanding the testimony of a witness in a subsequent hearing is the same as to maximum percentage of industrial handicap as that given on a former hearing, when the director based the award on other testimony showing a lower percentage, such testimony is not incompetent, when taken in proper relation to all evidence in the ease, to establish a greater percentage on the subsequent hearing on a claim of change of condition.

3. The evidence was sufficient to support the award based on a change in condition showing an,increase of 8-1/3 per cent, in permanent, partial, industrial handicap, and this court is powerless to interfere. Smith v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 63 Ga. App. 898, 899 (12 S. E. 2d, 366). The superior court did not err in affirming the award of the board approving the findings of the director.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., ooneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 S.E.2d 907, 66 Ga. App. 51, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/royal-indemnity-company-v-babb-gactapp-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack