Young v. Griffin
329 Ga. App. 413
Ga. Ct. App.2014Background
- On June 19, 2010, Eugene Young (motorcyclist) collided with James Griffin’s truck at a railroad crossing; Young sued for personal injuries.
- Young testified he approached southbound at ~25 mph, did not see flashing signals until at the tracks, braked and struck Griffin’s truck which was blocking his lane.
- Griffin testified he began a U-turn after the crossing arm began descending (no oncoming traffic seen) and was nearly finished when Young struck him; his truck frame was damaged.
- Eyewitnesses and the investigating officer testified the crossing gate began descending before Griffin started his U-turn and that they did not see Young before impact; skid-mark photos were introduced.
- A jury apportioned fault: Young 51% and Griffin 49%; trial court entered judgment for Griffin. Young appealed, raising improper closing-argument and improper jury-charge claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court inadequately responded to Griffin counsel's allegedly improper closing referring to "perception and reaction time" | Young: counsel misstated evidence and trial court should have rebuked, instructed curatively, or declared mistrial | Griffin: argument did not change result; jury instructed lawyers' statements aren't evidence | Held: No reversible error; objection not timely preserved and, assuming impropriety, argument likely did not change outcome given other evidence and jury instruction that arguments are not evidence. |
| Whether jury should have been charged under OCGA § 40-6-140 (stop at railroad crossing) | Young: evidence did not support statutory violation instruction | Griffin: circumstantial evidence (gate descending; Young on tracks) supported the charge | Held: Charge on § 40-6-140 was supported by the evidence; correct to give. |
| Whether jury should have been charged under OCGA § 40-6-180 (reasonable/prudent speed approaching crossing) | Young: not supported by evidence | Griffin: issue of approaching/crossing railroad crossing made statute applicable | Held: Charge on § 40-6-180 was supported and properly given. |
| Whether jury should have been charged under OCGA § 40-6-182 (speed-limit setting authority) | Young: statute governs officials, not drivers; instruction inapplicable | Griffin: instruction harmless because posted speed undisputed and not contested | Held: Instruction on § 40-6-182 was inapplicable but harmless; not reversible error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Stolte v. Fagan, 291 Ga. 477 (standard: appellate review whether improper argument in reasonable probability changed result)
- Smith v. Stacey, 281 Ga. 601 (duty of counsel to obtain ruling on objections)
- Mullins v. Thompson, 274 Ga. 366 (motion for mistrial based on improper closing argument must be timely)
- Williams v. Capitol Corporate Cleaning, 313 Ga. App. 61 (inapplicable jury instruction not reversible if not misleading or prejudicial)