Sasser v. Adkinson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sasser v. Adkinson

574 S.E.2d 907, 258 Ga. App. 699, 2002 Fulton County D. Rep. 3665, 2002 Ga. App. LEXIS 1566

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 4, 2002

DocketA02A1947

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 574 S.E.2d 907 (Sasser v. Adkinson) 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

Sasser v. Adkinson, 574 S.E.2d 907, 258 Ga. App. 699, 2002 Fulton County D. Rep. 3665, 2002 Ga. App. LEXIS 1566 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Blackburn, Chief Judge.

Pam Sasser appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion for new trial, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence (1) a police incident report of domestic violence between Sasser and appellee Adkinson, and (2) orders finding Adkinson in contempt of a family violence restraining order. For the reason set forth below, we affirm.

In two enumerations of error, Sasser complains that the trial court committed reversible error when it granted Adkinson’s motions in limine to exclude from evidence a police incident report of an altercation she had with Adkinson in 1997 in a hotel in California and contempt orders resulting from Adkinson’s violations of a consent protective order. Our review of the record convinces us that the trial court did not err in granting Adkinson’s motions in limine, but even if it had, “a case will not be reversed merely because error may have occurred. Appellant is required to show harm as well as error to prevail on appeal, and this appellant must show by the record as harm cannot be established by unsupported assertions contained in trial briefs.” (Citations omitted.) Hertz Corp. v. McCray. 1

In this case, Sasser failed to include in the record copies of the incident report and the contempt orders and likewise failed to read the contents of the documents into the transcript. Sasser made no proffer as to the contents of these documents, nor was any attempt made to identify the contents of the documents for the record and subsequent appellate purposes. Under these circumstances, Sasser *700 has failed to show harm. Outdoor Systems v. Woodson. 2 See also Zone Enterprises v. George L. Smith II Ga. &c. Auth. 3

Decided December 4, 2002. Cummings, Kelley & Bishop, Thomas S. Bishop, for appellant. David A. Powell, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Johnson, P. J., and Miller, J., concur.

1

Hertz Corp. v. McCray, 198 Ga. App. 484, 486 (2) (402 SE2d 298) (1991).

2

Outdoor Systems v. Woodson, 221 Ga. App. 901, 903-904 (473 SE2d 204) (1996).

3

Zone Enterprises v. George L. Smith II Ga. &c. Auth., 234 Ga. App. 238, 240-241 (506 SE2d 424) (1998).

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

Blackburn, Chief Judge.

Pam Sasser appeals the trial court’s denial of her motion for new trial, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence (1) a police incident report of domestic violence between Sasser and appellee Adkinson, and (2) orders finding Adkinson in contempt of a family violence restraining order. For the reason set forth below, we affirm.

In two enumerations of error, Sasser complains that the trial court committed reversible error when it granted Adkinson’s motions in limine to exclude from evidence a police incident report of an altercation she had with Adkinson in 1997 in a hotel in California and contempt orders resulting from Adkinson’s violations of a consent protective order. Our review of the record convinces us that the trial court did not err in granting Adkinson’s motions in limine, but even if it had, “a case will not be reversed merely because error may have occurred. Appellant is required to show harm as well as error to prevail on appeal, and this appellant must show by the record as harm cannot be established by unsupported assertions contained in trial briefs.” (Citations omitted.) Hertz Corp. v. McCray. 1

In this case, Sasser failed to include in the record copies of the incident report and the contempt orders and likewise failed to read the contents of the documents into the transcript. Sasser made no proffer as to the contents of these documents, nor was any attempt made to identify the contents of the documents for the record and subsequent appellate purposes. Under these circumstances, Sasser *700 has failed to show harm. Outdoor Systems v. Woodson. 2 See also Zone Enterprises v. George L. Smith II Ga. &c. Auth. 3

Decided December 4, 2002. Cummings, Kelley & Bishop, Thomas S. Bishop, for appellant. David A. Powell, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Johnson, P. J., and Miller, J., concur.

1

Hertz Corp. v. McCray, 198 Ga. App. 484, 486 (2) (402 SE2d 298) (1991).

2

Outdoor Systems v. Woodson, 221 Ga. App. 901, 903-904 (473 SE2d 204) (1996).

3

Zone Enterprises v. George L. Smith II Ga. &c. Auth., 234 Ga. App. 238, 240-241 (506 SE2d 424) (1998).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

574 S.E.2d 907, 258 Ga. App. 699, 2002 Fulton County D. Rep. 3665, 2002 Ga. App. LEXIS 1566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sasser-v-adkinson-gactapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack