 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
ELLIS v. OLIVER6/17/1996
ef fails to identify any bills introduced at trial that were unrelated to the alleged negligence. Second, the only evidence presented at trial regarding the bills was Dr. McAlary's testimony that he reviewed each bill line-by-line to determine which items were directly related to appellant's negligence. Only those items that Dr. McAlary testified were directly related to appellant's negligence were submitted to the jury.
Appellant also argues the trial court erred in admitting into evidence certain unspecified bills because they had not been paid by either Ellis or his estate and were no longer debts of the estate. We disagree. Whether or not these bills were debts of the estate, they were still admissible to show the extent of pain and suffering Ellis endured as the result of appellant's alleged negligence. Whether respondent could properly recover for such bills, however, is an issue that was not
Finally, appellant argues the trial court erred in not allowing him to introduce unspecified records that showed Ellis' medical condition prior to the accident. Appellant contends these records were relevant on the issue of damages because the records indicated Ellis was taking pain medication prior to his accident and therefore all of the pain Ellis suffered as a quadriplegic could not be attributable to appellant's conduct. However, appellant failed to proffer which records he sought to introduce. Consequently, this issue is not preserved for review. See Greenville Memorial Auditorium v. Martin, 301 S.C. 242, 391 S.E.2d 546 (1990) (failure to make proffer of excluded evidence precludes review on appeal).
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment below is
Affirmed.
Finney, C.J., and Toal, Moore and Waller, JJ., concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|