restriction rule (Georgia) · Go Syfert
← Georgia issues

restriction rule in Georgia

7 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1948–2008 0 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.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Johnson v. Knebelgreen
ga · 1997 · cited in 2 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–2008
2 sentences

2008In this *653 regard, this testimony is much like the expert in Johnson v. Knebel, 267 Ga. 853, 857-858 (3) ( 485 SE2d 451 ) (1997) (While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles and rules involved in the science in which they are learned, they are not, as to questions lying outside the domain of their expertise, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and not opinions.).

2008In this *653 regard, this testimony is much like the expert in Johnson v. Knebel, 267 Ga. 853, 857-858 (3) ( 485 SE2d 451 ) (1997) (While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles and rules involved in the science in which they are learned, they are not, as to questions lying outside the domain of their expertise, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and not opinions.).

22
Chandler Exterminators, Inc. v. Morrisgreen
ga · 1992 · cited in 2 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

22
Allison v. Stategreen
ga · 1987 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

11
Johnson v. Knebelgreen
gactapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

11
Smith v. Stategreen
ga · 1981 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

11
Dimambro Northend Associates v. Williamsgreen
gactapp · 1983 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
2 sentences

1986His determination will not be disturbed except that it be manifestly abused." (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Dimambro Northend Assoc. v. Williams, 169 Ga. App. 219, 220 ( 312 SE2d 386 ) (1983). "`While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles, and rules involved in the science [or trade] in which they are *258 learned, they are not, as to questions lying out of the domain of the science, art, or trade in which they are experts, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and not opinions.' [Cit.]" Southern R.

1986His determination will not be disturbed except that it be manifestly abused." (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Dimambro Northend Assoc. v. Williams, 169 Ga. App. 219, 220 ( 312 SE2d 386 ) (1983). "`While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles, and rules involved in the science [or trade] in which they are *258 learned, they are not, as to questions lying out of the domain of the science, art, or trade in which they are experts, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and not opinions.' [Cit.]" Southern R.

11
Southern Railway Company v. Cabegreen
gactapp · 1964 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
2 sentences

1986Co. v. Cabe, 109 Ga. App. 432, 443 ( 136 SE2d 438 ) (1964) (trial court abused discretion in allowing witness, qualified as mechanical engineer, civil engineer, and registered land surveyor, to give opinion on optical illusions).

1986Co. v. Cabe, 109 Ga. App. 432, 443 ( 136 SE2d 438 ) (1964) (trial court abused discretion in allowing witness, qualified as mechanical engineer, civil engineer, and registered land surveyor, to give opinion on optical illusions).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Hammond v. State green
ga · 1923
2 sentences

1992Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as permitting the administration or prescription of drugs or in any way infringing upon the practice of medicine as defined in the laws of this state. 2 (b) In Hammond v. State, 156 Ga. 880 (2) ( 120 SE 539 ) (1923), we stated: While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles, and rules involved in the science in which they are learned, they are not, as to questions lying out of the domain of the science, art, or trade in which they are experts, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and

1992Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as permitting the administration or prescription of drugs or in any way infringing upon the practice of medicine as defined in the laws of this state. 2 (b) In Hammond v. State, 156 Ga. 880 (2) ( 120 SE 539 ) (1923), we stated: While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles, and rules involved in the science in which they are learned, they are not, as to questions lying out of the domain of the science, art, or trade in which they are experts, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and

21964–1992
Tam v. Newsome green
gactapp · 1977
2 sentences

1997See Green, supra, pp. 217-218, § 112. 11 Green, supra; Tam, v. Newsome, 141 Ga. App. 76 ( 232 SE2d 613 ) (1977). 12 See Rumsey, Agnor’s Georgia Evidence, p. 199, § 9-2 (1993). 13 In reaching this conclusion, we assume without deciding that the issue of which impact caused Johnson’s injury was not beyond the ken of the average juror, and thus was an appropriate subject for lay opinion. 14 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 15 Morris, 262 Ga. at 258. 16 As noted, Lindsay was a trained professional engineer with experience in accident reconstruction.

1997See Green, supra, pp. 217-218, § 112. 11 Green, supra; Tam, v. Newsome, 141 Ga. App. 76 ( 232 SE2d 613 ) (1977). 12 See Rumsey, Agnor’s Georgia Evidence, p. 199, § 9-2 (1993). 13 In reaching this conclusion, we assume without deciding that the issue of which impact caused Johnson’s injury was not beyond the ken of the average juror, and thus was an appropriate subject for lay opinion. 14 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 15 Morris, 262 Ga. at 258. 16 As noted, Lindsay was a trained professional engineer with experience in accident reconstruction.

11997–1997
Dual S. Enterprises, Inc. v. Webb green
gactapp · 1976
2 sentences

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

1997All the Justices concur. 1 Johnson v. Knebel, 222 Ga. App. 522, 523 ( 474 SE2d 636 ) (1996). 2 Allison v. State, 256 Ga. 851, 852 ( 353 SE2d 805 ) (1987); Smith v. State, 247 Ga. 612, 619 ( 277 SE2d 678 ) (1981). 3 OCGA § 24-9-67 (1995). 4 138 Ga. App. at 811 . 5 Green, Georgia Law of Evidence, p. 207, § 110 (3rd ed. 1988). 6 See Chandler Exterminators v. Morris, 262 Ga. 257, 258 ( 416 SE2d 277 ) (1992) (as to questions lying outside the domain of the science, art, or trade in which expertise exists, expert witnesses are not exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to s

11997–1997
SHANNON COMPANY, INC. v. Heneveld green
ga · 1975
1 sentence

1992Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as permitting the administration or prescription of drugs or in any way infringing upon the practice of medicine as defined in the laws of this state. 2 (b) In Hammond v. State, 156 Ga. 880 (2) ( 120 SE 539 ) (1923), we stated: While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles, and rules involved in the science in which they are learned, they are not, as to questions lying out of the domain of the science, art, or trade in which they are experts, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and

11992–1992
Barrow v. State green
ga · 1975
1 sentence

1992Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as permitting the administration or prescription of drugs or in any way infringing upon the practice of medicine as defined in the laws of this state. 2 (b) In Hammond v. State, 156 Ga. 880 (2) ( 120 SE 539 ) (1923), we stated: While expert witnesses may give their opinions as to facts, principles, and rules involved in the science in which they are learned, they are not, as to questions lying out of the domain of the science, art, or trade in which they are experts, exempt from the restriction of the rule which requires witnesses to state facts and

11992–1992
Harmon v. First National Bank neutral
gactapp · 1934
2 sentences

1948The cardinal rule in the construction of a deed is to ascertain ’the intention of the parties.” Harmon v. First National Bank, 50 Ga. App. 3 ( 176 S. E. 833 ).

1948The cardinal rule in the construction of a deed is to ascertain ’the intention of the parties.” Harmon v. First National Bank, 50 Ga. App. 3 ( 176 S. E. 833 ).

11948–1948

Where else courts name it

NY 21 (1935–2026) TX 21 (1847–2018) CA 19 (1958–2019) FL 12 (1986–2020) PA 10 (1972–2026) GA 7 (1948–2008) CT 6 (1972–1997) NJ 6 (1949–2016) LA 5 (1909–1986) IL 5 (1898–2021) AL 5 (1921–2014) MS 4 (1927–2018) AZ 4 (1899–2011) MI 4 (1923–2001) IN 4 (1896–2019) MN 3 (2014–2023) OR 3 (1917–2003) DC 3 (1991–2017) MD 3 (1989–2001) NH 3 (1986–2007) MO 2 (1989–2001) WV 2 (2015–2015) WA 2 (1906–1920) WI 2 (1914–1994) NM 2 (2013–2016) AK 2 (2016–2017) ME 2 (2007–2020) OH 2 (2016–2024) MA 2 (1862–1905)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check