Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Thompson v. Ezorgreen2 sentences2012Notwithstanding the apparent conflict, however, “the self-contradictory testimony rule of Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., [ 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986)], does not apply to the testimony of a non-party expert witness.” (Punctuation omitted.) Thompson v. Ezor, 272 Ga. 849, 853 (2) ( 536 SE2d 749 ) (2000). 2012Notwithstanding the apparent conflict, however, “the self-contradictory testimony rule of Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., [ 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986)], does not apply to the testimony of a non-party expert witness.” (Punctuation omitted.) Thompson v. Ezor, 272 Ga. 849, 853 (2) ( 536 SE2d 749 ) (2000). | 4 | 6 |
Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc.green2 sentences2022Again, we discern no abuse of discretion by the trial court. [OCGA § 24-8-826] provides a specified exception to the hearsay rule and allows admission of medical opinions without requiring the production of the doctor as a sworn witness at trial. . . . [T]he statute authorizes the admission of such reports insofar as they consist of medical opinions relating to the “history, examination, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, or interpretation of tests or examinations, 5 We note that the self-contradictory testimony rule of Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986 2022Again, we discern no abuse of discretion by the trial court. [OCGA § 24-8-826] provides a specified exception to the hearsay rule and allows admission of medical opinions without requiring the production of the doctor as a sworn witness at trial. . . . [T]he statute authorizes the admission of such reports insofar as they consist of medical opinions relating to the “history, examination, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, or interpretation of tests or examinations, 5 We note that the self-contradictory testimony rule of Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986 | 2 | 10 |
Ezor v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2010In Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga.App. 275 , 526 S.E.2d 609 (1999), we held the self-contradictory testimony rule of Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 , 343 S.E.2d 680 (1986), did not apply to the testimony of a nonparty expert witness, and this holding was affirmed in Thompson v. Ezor, 272 Ga. 849 , 536 S.E.2d 749 (2000). "[C]ontradictions go solely to the expert's credibility, and are to be assessed by the jury when weighing the expert's testimony." Id. at 853 , 536 S.E.2d 749 . 2010In Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga.App. 275 , 526 S.E.2d 609 (1999), we held the self-contradictory testimony rule of Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 , 343 S.E.2d 680 (1986), did not apply to the testimony of a nonparty expert witness, and this holding was affirmed in Thompson v. Ezor, 272 Ga. 849 , 536 S.E.2d 749 (2000). "[C]ontradictions go solely to the expert's credibility, and are to be assessed by the jury when weighing the expert's testimony." Id. at 853 , 536 S.E.2d 749 . | 2 | 5 |
Sikes v. Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLCgreen2 sentences2025See Sikes v. Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC, 321 Ga. App. 136, 139 ( 741 SE2d 263 ) (2013) (vacating and remanding for the trial 11 court to determine whether the self-contradictory testimony rule applied, where its order was unclear as to whether it made any such determinations), overruled in part on other grounds in Pollard, supra at 876 (2) (a) n. 5. 4. 2025See Sikes v. Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC, 321 Ga. App. 136, 139 ( 741 SE2d 263 ) (2013) (vacating and remanding for the trial 11 court to determine whether the self-contradictory testimony rule applied, where its order was unclear as to whether it made any such determinations), overruled in part on other grounds in Pollard, supra at 876 (2) (a) n. 5. 4. | 2 | 2 |
Cottingham v. Sappgreen1 sentence2024See Cottingham v. Sapp, 344 Ga. App. 651 , 653 (2) ( 811 SE2d 442 ) (2018) (“Although the trial court here did not expressly address this issue in his summary judgment order, his ruling in [the defendant’s] favor implies that he disregarded [the plaintiff’s] allegedly contradictory testimony.”); compare Sikes v. Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC, 321 Ga. App. 136, 139 (1) ( 741 SE2d 263 ) (2013) (vacating and remanding for the trial court to determine whether the self-contradictory testimony rule applied, where its order was entirely unclear as to whether it made “any direct or express determin | 1 | 1 |
Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academygreen2 sentences2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. 2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. | 1 | 1 |
Tuten v. Costrinigreen2 sentences2000Hosp., 225 Ga. App. 608, 609 ( 484 SE2d 257 ) (1997); Tuten v. Costrini, 238 Ga. App. 350, 353-354 (2) (a) ( 518 SE2d 751 ) (1999) (applying the rule to expert testimony). 2000Hosp., 225 Ga. App. 608, 609 ( 484 SE2d 257 ) (1997); Tuten v. Costrini, 238 Ga. App. 350, 353-354 (2) (a) ( 518 SE2d 751 ) (1999) (applying the rule to expert testimony). | 1 | 1 |
Leonardson v. Georgia Power Co.green2 sentences2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon 2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon | 1 | 1 |
Gaines v. INGLES MARKETS, INC.green2 sentences2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon 2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon | 1 | 1 |
Abdul-Majeed v. Emory University Hospitalgreen2 sentences2000Hosp., 225 Ga. App. 608, 609 ( 484 SE2d 257 ) (1997); Tuten v. Costrini, 238 Ga. App. 350, 353-354 (2) (a) ( 518 SE2d 751 ) (1999) (applying the rule to expert testimony). 2000Hosp., 225 Ga. App. 608, 609 ( 484 SE2d 257 ) (1997); Tuten v. Costrini, 238 Ga. App. 350, 353-354 (2) (a) ( 518 SE2d 751 ) (1999) (applying the rule to expert testimony). | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Douglasgreen2 sentences2000Miller v. Douglas, 235 Ga. 222, 223 ( 219 SE2d 144 ) (1975). [The] holding [that] “the testimony of a party who offers himself as a witness in his own behalf is to be construed most strongly against him,” passing upon a motion for summary judgment, does not apply to contradictory statements by witnesses who are not parties to the litigation. 2000Miller v. Douglas, 235 Ga. 222, 223 ( 219 SE2d 144 ) (1975). [The] holding [that] “the testimony of a party who offers himself as a witness in his own behalf is to be construed most strongly against him,” passing upon a motion for summary judgment, does not apply to contradictory statements by witnesses who are not parties to the litigation. | 1 | 1 |
Ewers v. Coopergreen2 sentences2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. 2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. | 1 | 1 |
Schernekau v. McNabbgreen2 sentences2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon 2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon | 1 | 1 |
Stegall v. Central Georgia Electric Membership Corp.green2 sentences2000Membership Corp., 221 Ga. App. 187, 190 (2) ( 470 SE2d 782 ) (1996). 10 223 Ga. App. 297, 298 (2) ( 477 SE2d 435 ) (1996). 11 Supra. 12 209 Ga. App. 99, 100 (2) ( 432 SE2d 675 ) (1993). 2000Membership Corp., 221 Ga. App. 187, 190 (2) ( 470 SE2d 782 ) (1996). 10 223 Ga. App. 297, 298 (2) ( 477 SE2d 435 ) (1996). 11 Supra. 12 209 Ga. App. 99, 100 (2) ( 432 SE2d 675 ) (1993). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.green2 sentences2000Membership Corp., 221 Ga. App. 187, 190 (2) ( 470 SE2d 782 ) (1996). 10 223 Ga. App. 297, 298 (2) ( 477 SE2d 435 ) (1996). 11 Supra. 12 209 Ga. App. 99, 100 (2) ( 432 SE2d 675 ) (1993). 2000Membership Corp., 221 Ga. App. 187, 190 (2) ( 470 SE2d 782 ) (1996). 10 223 Ga. App. 297, 298 (2) ( 477 SE2d 435 ) (1996). 11 Supra. 12 209 Ga. App. 99, 100 (2) ( 432 SE2d 675 ) (1993). | 1 | 1 |
Callaway v. Crown Crafts, Inc.green2 sentences2000Membership Corp., 221 Ga. App. 187, 190 (2) ( 470 SE2d 782 ) (1996). 10 223 Ga. App. 297, 298 (2) ( 477 SE2d 435 ) (1996). 11 Supra. 12 209 Ga. App. 99, 100 (2) ( 432 SE2d 675 ) (1993). 2000Membership Corp., 221 Ga. App. 187, 190 (2) ( 470 SE2d 782 ) (1996). 10 223 Ga. App. 297, 298 (2) ( 477 SE2d 435 ) (1996). 11 Supra. 12 209 Ga. App. 99, 100 (2) ( 432 SE2d 675 ) (1993). | 1 | 1 |
Sawyer v. DeKalb Medical Center, Inc.green2 sentences2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. 2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Beamon v. Georgia Power Co.
green
2 sentences2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon 2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Ford v. Dove
green
2 sentences2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. 2000Center, 234 Ga. App. 54, 56-57 (2) ( 506 SE2d 197 ) (1998); Flanagan v. Riverside Military Academy, 218 Ga. App. 123, 125-126 ( 460 SE2d 824 ) (1995); Ewers v. Cooper, 217 Ga. App. 434, 435 ( 457 SE2d 705 ) (1995) (refusing to apply the self-contradictory testimony rule to expert testimony in different settings) with Ford v. Dove, 218 Ga. App. 828 (1) ( 463 SE2d 351 ) (1995); Abdul-Majeed v. Emory Univ. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Jackson v. Post Properties, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon 2000J., and Smith, P. J., concur. 1 199 Ga. App. 309 ( 404 SE2d 463 ) (1991). 2 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 312 . 3 (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Id. at 311 . 4 See Schernekau v. McNabb, 220 Ga. App. 772, 773 ( 470 SE2d 296 ) (1996). 5 See Ezor v. Thompson, 241 Ga. App. 275, 277 (1) ( 526 SE2d 609 ) (1999) (holding that the self-contradictory testimony rule set forth in Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 ( 343 SE2d 680 ) (1986), does not apply to expert testimony). 6 See generally Jackson v. Post Properties, 236 Ga. App. 701 ( 513 SE2d 259 ) (1999). 7 Leon | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.