Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

705 does not avoid the requirements of logic in

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: s, patient history, laboratory results (can be established under business records as admissible) Facts proved at trial by competent evidence other than the testimony of the expert (involves the use of the hypothetical question, first the party introduces the pertinent medical facts and then the non-treating expert is asked to assume those facts in a hypothetical and then asked whether she can form an opinion based on those facts and what is it) There must be evidence to support the facts posed in the hypothetical Question will be objectionable if it leaves out undisputed facts that are material core of it! This device is logically necessary; if you have an expert who lacks personal knowledge of some or all of the facts it is hard to think of any other way to get an input of that person than a hypothetical. If there are disputed facts, on cross the opposing party can ask a hypothetical based on their set of facts! Facts supplied by the expert or acquired by the expert out of court other than through personal knowledge, other than admissible hearsay This is what 703 addresses As long as in the pertinent field of expertise, those sources would be regarded as suffi...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online