Opinions and Experts

Question 1

Opinions, Expertise & Experts

FRE 701: Opinion Testimony By Lay Witness

Answer 1

Example: Samantha, a lay witness can testify that Paula, the plaintiff, looked tired, even through it may seem more of an opinion then a fact. More Persuasive testimony would include the underying facts upon which Samantha’s opinon was based (for instance, the Paula had bags under her eyes, Yawned frequently, and had trouble fousing).. But, even without such detial, the trial judge should admit Samantha’s lay opinion if it is rationally based on her perceptions and helpful to the fact-finder.

Question 2

FRE 702: Testimony By Expert Witness

Answer 2

FRE 702: govern expets and defines expertise broadly. Experts can be qualified through:

• Knowlege
• Skill
• Expertise
• Training or
• Education

An expert need not possess fancy degrees or certifications. A car mechanic can be an expert; so can a nursery school teacher. One federal court deemed a habitual marjuana user an expert regarding the quality and origin of the marjuana in question US. v. Johnson. His mother must have been so proud.

Expert testimony must help the jury to understand the evidence or to determine a fact. Although expert testimony is not limited to information entirely beyond the knowledge of jurors, the expert testimopny must add value and just reelate information that reasonable fact finder would already know

Courts must evaluate the methodology and scientic conclusions of an expert. In addtion to helping the fact finder understand the evidence o rdertermine a disputed fact FRE 702 requires that the trial judge must determine that.

                            - The testomony is based upon sufficient facts or data: 
                            - The testmony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and 
                            - The expert has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. 

This last element arguably augments the Daubert standard, which addressed the expert’s principles and methodology but not the expert’s actual application of those principles.

Question 3

FRE 703 Basis of an Expert’s Opinion Testimony

Answer 3

FRE 703: Provides that anexpert’s opinon testmony may derive from:

              - Personal Knowledge
              - Any information the expert has learned in preparation for testimony; or 
              - Training and study. 

FRE 703: Clarifies that the information ised to form the testifying expert’s opinon need not be otherwise admissible at trial as long as “experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on those kinds of facts or data in forming an opinon on the subject.” Functionally Rule 703 grants experts the discretion to reach conclusiojn in the manner that they nortmally would outside the courtroom. Experts may rely on hearsay, Character evidence, and unauthenticated documents if doing so is the accepted method of gatherign information in their field.

Just becasue experts may rely on inadmissiable evidence to reach their ecpert conclusion, however, does not mean that such experts may directly convey those inadmissibnle facts to the jury. They cannot become conduits for hearsay and other inadissiable evidence.

Therefore, as a general rule, experts may not testify on direct examination about the inadmissible evidence on which they relied.

FRE 703: Allows the propenent of the expert to prest otherwise inadmissible facts or data underlying that expert;s opinion only if, in the discrestion of the court, the probative value of those facts or data in helping the jury evaluate the expert;s opinion substantially outweighs the risk of prejudice to the opposing party in making that inadmissible evidence known to the jury. This is a high standard and will not often be met.

Question 4

FRE 704: Opinon on an Ultimate Issue

Answer 4

Question 5

FRE 705: Disclosing the Facts or Data Underlying an Expert’s Opinon

Answer 5

Question 6

FRE 706: Court Appointed Expert Witnesses

Answer 6