Ingram v. Mccuiston

261 N.C. 392, 134 S.E.2d 705 (1964)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ingram (P) was injured in a three-car collision involving herself and McCuiston (D). As a result of the accident, P sustained injuries to her neck and back. She also underwent psychiatric treatment for anxiety allegedly caused by the accident. P's orthopedist and psychiatrist both testified at trial. Miller, the orthopedist, testified on the basis of a series of hypothetical facts provided by P's counsel during the examination. P's counsel then asked Miller questions regarding his opinion as to whether such facts could have left P permanently injured, both physically and emotionally. Miller expressed an opinion that P could have suffered 'permanent anxiety.' D objected to the testimony on the grounds that 1) the hypothetical question contained facts which were not in evidence, and 2) the question was based in part on the opinion of Wright, P's psychiatrist.