A medical expert witness is called to testify in a personal injury case. The expert reviews the plaintiff's medical records, conducts an independent examination of the plaintiff, and listens to the plaintiff's testimony during the trial. During examination, opposing counsel objects to the expert's testimony, arguing that one of the bases for their opinion is improper. Which of the following is the BEST basis for this expert's testimony to render it admissible?
The expert’s consideration of statements from the plaintiff's spouse about their medical condition.
The expert's analysis based on trends observed in prior similar cases.
The expert's reliance on the plaintiff's testimony during the trial.
The expert's review of the plaintiff's medical records and independent medical examination.
The correct answer is proper because expert opinions may be based on personal knowledge (e.g., an independent medical examination), review of relevant evidence (e.g., medical records), or information reasonably relied upon by experts in their field. These sources ensure the testimony is rooted in objective and reliable facts. Testimony based on the plaintiff's statements during trial is less defensible because it raises concerns about selective interpretation or subjective bias. Similarly, reliance on information like a spouse's statements or abstract trends risks introducing speculative, irrelevant, or inadmissible bases into the expert's opinion. Reliable testimony avoids such pitfalls by adhering to professional and evidentiary standards.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What constitutes an expert witness in a medical case?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How important are medical records in expert testimony?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the standards for admissibility of expert testimony?