This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-12-04 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| However, courts do not immediately accord probative value to an admitted expert testimony, much less to an unobjected ordinary testimony respecting special knowledge. The reason is that the probative value of an expert testimony does not lie in a simple exposition of the expert's opinion. Rather, its weight lies in the assistance that the expert witness may afford the courts by demonstrating the facts which serve as a basis for his opinion and the reasons on which the logic of his conclusions is founded.[45] | |||||
|
2006-01-24 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| Expert testimony no doubt constitutes evidence worthy of meriting consideration, although not exclusive on questions of professional character. The courts of justice, however, are not bound to submit their findings necessarily to such testimony; they are free to weigh them, and they can give or refuse to give them any value as proof, or they can even counterbalance such evidence with other elements of conviction which may have been adduced during the trial.[23] Suffice it to state, expert opinion evidence is to be considered or weighed by the court like any other testimony, in the light of their own general knowledge and experience upon the subject of inquiry.[24] The probative force of the testimony of an expert does not lie in a mere statement of the theory or opinion of the expert, but rather in the aid that he can render to the courts in showing the facts which serve as a basis for his criterion and the reasons upon which the logic of his conclusion is founded.[25] | |||||