 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Anglin v. Harris5/22/2000
e. The sort of physical pain and discomfort described by Anglin in the instant case, while perhaps very real, is not the mental incapacity contemplated by the tolling statute. Indeed, on deposition Anglin gives a rational explanation for staying in bed after the accident: her physical pain resulted in her not wanting or not being able to get up or do anything, and she and her husband decided to wait a few days to see if her physical condition improved before taking her to see a doctor about the pain. Like the plaintiff in Walker, Anglin does not support her position with any medical evidence. We note that the examples Anglin's husband gave of Anglin "not making sense" actually indicate that she did understand what he was saying, was communicating well and was making decisions during those critical first few days after the accident.
The determination of whether one is mentally incapacitated within the meaning of the tolling statute can be made by the trial court as a matter of law. The trial court was authorized to find that the evidence relied upon by Anglin does not demonstrate that she was mentally incompetent as required by the statute. Because the record presents no genuine issue of material fact as to Anglin's mental competence, the grant of summary judgment was proper.
Judgment affirmed.
Phipps, J., and McMurray, Senior Appellate Judge, concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 Georgia Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|