Legal Opinion

Matheson v. Stilkenboom

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 3, 2001No. A01A1472PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ruffin, Judge.

Ruth Matheson sued Scott Stilkenboom for damages sustained in an automobile collision allegedly caused by Stilkenboom’s negligence. The jury returned a defense verdict, and Matheson appeals, claiming that the trial court erroneously refused to recharge the jury on the definition of negligence, allowed improper cross-examination, and committed two charging errors. For reasons that follow, we reverse the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict and remand for a new trial.

The evidence presented at trial showed that on January 26, 1998, Stilkenboom’s car collided with Matheson’s car…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Warren v. BallardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1996
  2. Freeman v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
  3. Jimenez v. Morgan Drive Away, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1999
  4. Brown v. City of FitzgeraldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
  5. Hubert v. City of MariettaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1968

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Stephens v. HypesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2005
  2. Kelley v. PurcellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
  3. MAXINEAU v. KingCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API