164 Ga. App. 485 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1982
This court granted an interlocutory appeal to decide whether the trial court erred in refusing to compel the defendant to respond to two discovery requests pertaining to the production of certain documents and the answering of certain interrogatories. After considering the briefs and listening to oral argument, we find that this appeal was improvidently granted and must be dismissed for reasons set forth.
Absent abuse, this appellate court will not interfere with the trial court’s exercise of its discretion and “ ‘[t]his policy is applicable to a trial judge’s exercise of the broad discretion granted to him under the discovery provisions of the Civil Practice Act.’ ” Roberts v. Farmer, 127 Ga. App. 237, 240 (193 SE2d 216) (1972). Here, the court found that discovery would be unduly burdensome on appellee (it would require the insurance company to produce 1500 insurance policies that the defendant wrote over a two-and-one-half year period
As to the failure of the court to require the defendant to answer certain interrogatories when the answers may be derived from business records, Code Ann. § 81A-133 (c) provides that it is sufficient for the answering party to specify the records from which the answer may be derived and afford the other party the opportunity to inspect and make copies or abstracts of the records. The defendant has offered to make these records available to Boykin at its home office.
Appeal dismissed.
