Sharpe v. Department of Transportation
Supreme Court of Georgia
1ConcurrenceCarley, Justice
I agree with the majority that DOT did not object either “to the fact that the response . . . was written” (maj. op. at 103) or to the method used by the trial court to respond to the jury’s questions. Furthermore, DOT did not object to the substance of the trial court’s response. Instead, DOT “limited its objection solely to the trial court’s giving of any response of any nature to the questions” of the jury. (Maj. op. at 102.) If DOT had raised an objection to the content of the trial court’s response, it would have been reversible error, in my opinion, for the trial court to fail to change…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Suddeth v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Imperial Investment Co. v. Modernization Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
- Edwards v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Hathaway v. BishopCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1994
- Miller v. DeanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.