Fit requires a valid connection between the expert's inquiry and the issue in the case. Testimony may be scientifically valid yet inadmissible because it does not address the question the jury must decide.
It is a relevance requirement specific to expert evidence.
Alternative Names:
Fit, Relevance of Expert Testimony
Why it Matters?
Fit challenges succeed where an expert offers general propositions without connecting them to the specific facts, which is common in causation testimony that establishes an agent can cause a disease without addressing whether it did here. The distinction between general and specific causation is the clearest application. Testimony that would be valid in a different case is not admissible in this one.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
What does fit require?
What is the clearest application?
