Lay opinions must rely on facts personally observed. Under Rule 701, courts scrutinize lay opinions by determining whether the testimony is based on the witness’ own experience base and everyday reasoning. Subsection (c) is a direct contrast to the definition of expert testimony in the subsequent rule. Subsection (a) requires first-hand knowledge or observation, while subsection (b) demands a lay witness opinion that is meaningful and carries more conviction than a broad assertion. It states that if a witness is not testifying as an expert, opinion testimony must be: a) rationally based on the witness’s perception b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue and c) not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of Rule 702. The first rule in Article VII begins by defining expert testimony by what it is not – lay witness testimony. Rule 701 – Opinion Testimony By Lay Witnesses
An understanding of Article VII is critical for any lawyer seeking to introduce or exclude expert testimony at trial. Article VII of the Federal Rules of Evidence, comprised of six rules, covers the admissibility of expert witness testimony.
0 kommentar(er)
