Q: legal theories that Not require expert witness testimony
What legal theories presume that expert witness testimony is not required?
Fiduciary duty is such, as well as fraud. What are others?
Given that case is not medical professional negligence.
A:
In California, there are several legal theories that generally do not require expert witness testimony, apart from medical professional negligence cases. Some of these include:
1. Breach of Contract: In most breach of contract cases, the terms of the contract and the actions of the parties can be understood by a layperson, making expert testimony unnecessary.
2. Fraud: As you mentioned, fraud cases often do not require expert testimony, as the elements of fraud (misrepresentation, knowledge of falsity, intent to deceive, reliance, and resulting damages) can typically be established through lay witness testimony and documentary evidence.
3. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Similar to fraud, breach of fiduciary duty cases often do not require expert testimony, as the existence of a fiduciary relationship and the alleged breach can be established through lay witness testimony and documentary evidence.
4. Negligence (non-professional): In some negligence cases not involving professional negligence, expert testimony may not be necessary if the standard of care and breach of that standard are within the common understanding of a layperson.
5. Intentional Torts: Many intentional torts, such as battery, assault, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, do not typically require expert testimony, as the elements can be established through lay witness testimony.
6. Statutory Violations: Cases involving violations of certain statutes, such as the California Labor Code or the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, may not require expert testimony if the statutory requirements and violations can be understood by a layperson.
However, it is important to note that the need for expert testimony can vary depending on the specific facts and complexities of each case. In some instances, even cases involving these legal theories may benefit from or require expert testimony to establish certain elements or educate the jury on complex issues.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
