Legal Opinion

Howell v. Federated Mutual Implement & Hardware Insurance

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 6, 1966No. 42155PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Deen, Judge.

1. Although depositions taken by one of the parties to a workmen’s compensation case are a part of the file sent to this court, where they were not introduced in evidence they will not be considered. Smith v. Continental Cas. Co., 102 Ga. App. 559 (2) (116 SE2d 888). The judge of the superior court did not err in sustaining a motion to expunge from the record sent up to that court by the Board of Workmen’s Compensation a deposition of the claimant taken prior to trial by the employer and insurance carrier for purposes of discovery, a deposition of a hospital employee identifying…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Burson v. HowellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
  2. Smith v. Continental Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
  3. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company v. PulliamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1959
  4. Overton-Green Drive-It-Yourself System Inc. v. CookCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Maloy v. DixonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
  2. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. SnyderCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
  3. Argonaut Insurance Co. v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971
  4. Jackson v. U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
  5. Pan American Fire & Casualty Co. v. GuessCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API