Expert testimony is not always required to establish proximate cause; circumstantial evidence may suffice. Buckley v. General Motors Corp.,54 Fed. Appx. 712, 713 (2d Cir. 2003); Arnold v. Krause, Inc., 233 F.R.D. 126, 132 (W.D.N.Y. 2005).
See Kumho v. Carmichael,526 U.S. 137, 156 (1999); (expert testimony does not require that expert collect own data or conduct own tests); Gussack Realty Co. v. Xerox Corp.,224 F.3d 85, 94-95 (2d Cir. 2000). Instead, “an expert might draw a conclusion based on extensive and specialized experience.” Kehm v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,580 F. Supp. 890, 903 (N.D. Iowa 1982) (expert may properly base opinion on studies conducted by others), aff’d, 724 F.2d 613 (8th Cir. 1983).
Subscribe to Litigation Pathfinder
To get the full-text of this Legal Memorandum ... and more!
(Month-to-month and annual subscriptions available)