 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
JOHNSTON v. AIKEN AUTO PARTS3/15/1993
evidence); Mali v. Odom, 295 S.C. 78, 367 S.E.2d 166 (Ct.App. 1988) (both error and prejudice must be shown to secure a reversal based on the admission of evidence); cf. Nabors v. South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co., 273 S.C. 126, 129, 255 S.E.2d 337, 338 (1979) ("`A general verdict for plaintiff . . . does not necessarily find that plaintiff is entitled to recover the amount alleged to be due, and does not impute a finding not essential to recovery.'"), overruled on other grounds by Johnson v. South State Ins. Co., 288 S.C. 239, 341 S.E.2d 793 (1986); Kelly v. Brazell, 253 S.C. 564, 568, 172 S.E.2d 304, 306 (1970) (where a jury returned a general verdict, the supreme court noted it had no way of knowing whether future medical was allowed); cf. also Anderson v. West, 270 S.C. 184, 241 S.E.2d 551 (1978) (a verdict will not be reversed where a jury returns a general verdict in a case involving two or more issues or defenses and the jury's verdict is supported by at least one issue or defense).
II.
During his instructions to the jury, the trial judge charged the South Carolina Life Expectancy Tables. S.C. Code Ann. ยง 19-1-150 (1985). Aiken Auto Parts objected to the charge because no expert witness testified Johnston suffered any permanent injury . Aiken Auto Parts argues the charge was inappropriate. We disagree.
A trial judge may properly charge the life expectancy tables to the jury in a
Here, there was evidence of "permanent injury ." Johnston testified his right knee "never has gotten right." He also testified without objection that " othing can be done" about his knee, such as inserting a prosthesis, because " t's too badly damaged."
Affirmed.
CURETON, J., and LITTLEJOHN, A.J., concur.
|