An expert in a Georgia case may build an opinion on information that would never be admissible on its own.
What the Statute Says
Under OCGA 24-7-703, the facts or data an expert relies on “may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing.” And “[i]f of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field in forming opinions or inferences upon the subject, such facts or data need not be admissible in evidence in order for the opinion or inference to be admitted.”
What That Looks Like in Practice
In Fields v. Taylor, 340 Ga. App. 706 (2017), a defendant moved to exclude the plaintiff’s medical experts because they had formed their opinions from records that were neither sworn nor certified. The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of that motion, holding that nothing in the statute “requires an expert to base her opinion on certified medical records.” Because the records were of a type reasonably relied on by experts in the field, the testimony came in even though the records did not.
Likewise, Evans v. Department of Transportation, 331 Ga. App. 313 (2015), confirms that “an expert properly may rely on inadmissible facts and data such as hearsay in reaching his opinion, if the facts or data are of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field.”
The Limit
Reliance is not the same as disclosure. Under the last sentence of OCGA 24-7-703, facts or data that are otherwise inadmissible “shall not be disclosed to the jury by the proponent of the opinion or inference unless the court determines that their probative value in assisting the jury to evaluate the expert’s opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect.” So an expert may rely on a report the jury never hears.
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!