Gardner v. Harriss

*701Judge Wynn

concurring.

I agree with the majority that a new trial is warranted in this case but on different grounds.

In the case sub judice, the plaintiff introduced photographs to assist her in describing her pathway through the warehouse. The trial judge limited their admissibility to illustrative purposes in the absence of authenticating testimony. Later, the trial court permitted the jury to view the photographic evidence in the jury room over the defendant’s objection. This was error.

Our Supreme Court has held that without the consent of parties, it is error to permit the jury to take…