trier of fact in understanding and disposing of issues relevant to the case
). A witness qualified as an expert may only offer testimony if
the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts
of the case.”
Fed. R. Evid. 702(b)-(d)
Additionally, expert testimony is subject to general evidentiary rules, such as Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403.
See United States v. LeBlanc
, 45 Fe
d. App’x 393, 400 (6th Cir. 2002)
testimony is subject to the same relevancy constraints as all other kinds of
Moisenko v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft
, 198 F.3d 246 (6th Cir. 1999) (applying Fed. R. Evid. 403 balancing test to expert testimony).
A. Expert Witness Testimony Must Be Based on Scientific, Technical, or
Specialized” Knowledge and Must Concern a Matter Beyond a Layperson’s
testimony must be based on “scientific
, technical, or other specialized knowledge [that] will help
the trier of fact.” Fed. R. Evid. 702
(a). A witness may not testify as an expert unless he or she testifies about matters that are beyond the ability and experience of the average layperson.
See, e.g., Berry v. City of Detroit
25 F.3d 1342, 1349-50 (6th Cir. 1994) (
If everyone knows [the knowledge in question], then we do not need an expert because the testimony will
not ‘assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact
. . . .
(quoting Fed. R. Evid. 702)).
2:12-cv-10285-BAF-MJH Doc # 116 Filed 02/05/14 Pg 3 of 20 Pg ID 2309