Key Takeaway
New York court reinforces that expert opinions must be based on properly admitted evidence, not unfounded photographs or materials.
In New York personal injury litigation, expert testimony plays a crucial role in establishing causation, damages, and the standard of care. However, courts maintain strict rules about what evidence experts can rely upon when forming their opinions. The foundation requirement ensures that expert testimony is based on reliable, admissible evidence rather than speculation or improperly introduced materials.
This evidentiary principle becomes particularly important when experts attempt to base opinions on photographs, medical records, or other documentary evidence. Without proper foundation establishing the authenticity, accuracy, and relevance of such materials, courts will exclude expert opinions that rely on them. This requirement protects the integrity of the judicial process and ensures that juries receive reliable expert testimony.
The foundation requirement is especially critical in personal injury cases where biomechanical evidence or photographic evidence might be used to reconstruct accident scenarios or demonstrate injury mechanisms. Courts have consistently held that experts cannot simply rely on any materials without proper evidentiary support, as seen in cases involving foundation requirements.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Pascocello v Jibone, 2018 NY Slip Op 03466 (1st Dept. 2018)
“An expert’s opinion “must be based on facts in the record or personally known to the witness” (Hambsch v New York City Tr. Auth., 63 NY2d 723, 725 ; see Roques v Noble, 73 AD3d 204, 206 ), and in the absence of such record support, an expert’s opinion is without probative force (see Diaz v New York Downtown Hosp., 99 NY2d 542, 544 ). Here, Supreme Court properly precluded Dr. Toosi from offering an opinion based on photographs for which no proper foundation had been established.
Key Takeaway
This decision reinforces a fundamental principle of expert testimony in New York courts: opinions must be grounded in properly admitted evidence or the expert’s personal knowledge. Attorneys cannot simply introduce photographs or other materials through expert witnesses without first establishing proper foundation through other testimony or evidence. This rule ensures that expert opinions have genuine probative value rather than being based on unverified or inadmissible materials.
