The Tennessee Bar Journal has published an article I wrote concerning the permissible scope of expert testimony. The article discusses the decision of the Tennessee Court of Appeals in Holder v. Westgate Resorts Ltd.. Here is the majority opinion and here is the concurring / dissenting opinion of Judge Susano.
This is an excerpt of the article, titled "That’s (Not) a Fact, Jack:"
The majority opinion in Holder has grave implications for the trial of cases involving experts. It has the potential for injustice to plaintiffs and defendants. Fortunately, the Tennessee Supreme Court accepted review of the case. In the view of this writer, the court should send a clear message that the proffered testimony in this case was properly excluded and that otherwise inadmissible facts, data and opinions should not normally find their way to the fact finder merely because an expert witness wants to testify about them.