Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

After a number of years federal rule 703 was amended

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: and then you ask her "are these facts sufficient for you to form an opinion" (without having to recite them all) and then ask for the opinion. 705 does not avoid the requirements of logic, in laying the foundation/setting the qualifications and opportunity to form an opinion, it just says you don't have to elicit individually all of those facts on direct if you don't want to. And then goes on to say, these can be inquired into on cross-examination. ARKANSAS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. SCHELL [Expert Testimony: Forms and Bases of Expert Testimony FRE 703, 705] Facts/Procedural Posture: Appellants condemned part of a 40 acre tract of appellees for construction of Highway 71 Expert witnesses for appelles testified that the amount of damages from taking would be $61,000. Expert witnesses for appellants testified that the amount of compensation owed was between $20K and $25K. Trial court refused to let the appellants inquire into the basis of one of their witness' opinion. Issue in contention: W...
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