 | Richard C. Dart - 2004 - 1990 pages
...provided in subdivision (b), testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact; (b) no expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a... | |
 | Jack V. Matson, Suha F. Daou, Jeffrey G. Soper - 2004 - 156 pages
...McCloskey, Recent developments in civil procedure and evidence, Torl and Law Journal (Winter 2001), 6. is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact, (b) No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a... | |
 | D. Larry Crumbley, Rezaee Zabihollah - 2004 - 980 pages
...provided in subdivision (b), testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact. (b) No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a... | |
 | James Beck, Anthony Vale - 2004 - 982 pages
...the Federal Rules of Evidence, "testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact."7 However, courts generally interpret this rule as forbidding witnesses from interpreting laws... | |
 | Michael Les Benedict, John F. Winkler - 2004 - 959 pages
...direct or cross-examination, proved to be inadmissible.53 Ohio R. Evid. 705 altered that practice: "The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give his reasons therefor after disclosure of the underlying facts or data. The disclosure may be in response to a hypothetical... | |
 | United States - 2005 - 48 pages
...provided in subdivision (b), testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact. (b) No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a... | |
 | Roger J. R. Levesque - 2006 - 746 pages
...provided in subdivision (b), testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact. (b) No expert witness testifying with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a... | |
 | Y. Ian Noy, Waldemar Karwowski - 2004 - 1031 pages
...to cross-examination. Rule 704 Testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the tried fact. The import of the deceptively simply stated Rule 704 is to allow the expert witness to... | |
 | Susan Becker - 2005 - 394 pages
...defects and causation).) 23 1 . See FED. R. EVID. 704(a) (allowing opinion or inference testimony even if "it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact."); Wilburn v. Maritrans GP, Inc., 139 F.3d 350, 355-56 (3d Cir. 1998) (concluding that barge captain employed... | |
 | James W. McElhaney - 2005 - 802 pages
...come first — they do not have to come at all. Rule 705 of the Federal Rules puts it very simply: The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the court requires... | |
| |
Except as provided in subdivision (b), testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact. 
