Isn’t that what I argued in the first place?

Okay, simplified (LOL) version:

(Gads, hats off to anyone in the legal profession...)

• Plaintiff-A argues Company-A manufactured/sold a defective product.

• Several persons come forward ascertaining the reliability of Plaintiff-A's complaint.

• Company-A (or Plaintiff-A) retains an EXPERT in the narrow field that the product is based.

• The EXPERT performs due diligence by forming a opinion of whether the product is, or, is not, defective based on:

• a) testing the product and coming to a factual conclusion;

• b) interviewing other persons who have used or connected with said product; and testing their experiences before concluding their experiences are valid (or not).

• c) having a connection/familiarity with said product field for a period so as to establish a credible 'expert' substantiation.

NOW, at trial, (with the new? or the revised? 703 and all its nuances) the EXPERT is placed in an advisor role to the 'fact-finder'; (Company-A or Plaintiff-A).

• The new/revised 703 allows that the EXPERT cannot give 'hearsay' (laymen's terms) testimony; and,

• if the EXPERT relies on others 'opinions/experiences', those who offered their 'opinions/experiences' must also be available for the jury to make their OWN determination if the 'other' person's opinion/experience warrants validation. (I think I've got this so far...)

BUT, isn't that what I argued in the first place?

That the testimony of an Expert, without collaborating testimonies, for the jury to decide for themselves, is hearsay? (Unless the EXPERT can reasonably come to the same conclusions without relying on others opinions/experiences/inadmissibles.)

(Or did I miss something...?)
 

THE BACKGROUND... (to my conclusion)

It started with:

HEY CRIMINAL LAWYERS, ARE YOU WATCHING U.S. SUPREME COURT JUNK SCIENCE FORENSICS CASE DERR V MARYLAND?

• Then the link <Petition-of-the-Day>

• Then my thoughts... "Isn't that called 'hearsay' and inadmissible?"

• Then the pain of learning I don't know nuthin':

• FRE 703; expert testimony is treated differently regarding hearsay, see: <a7r703cc> (The CONFIRMATION I don't know nuthin'...)

Really I can truly understand the complex and confusing regulations that make up the legal system and I hate the human race for being so damn 'precise'... (okay, not hate... 'cause ya'll KNOW I'm the persnickityest bia-t-ch out there!)

I shall update if warranted, since I’m sure I’ve got it wrong somehow...

*hugs* (do lawyers hug?)
~khrys...

*~*~*~*