Expert testimony regarding damages is often challenged on the basis that the expert has failed to properly consider causation. In some cases, the courts have ruled that the expert is allowed to assume causation and does not have to do further work to evaluate the causal linkage. In others, the courts have ruled that expert opinions should be excluded for failing to consider causation.
There are certain factors that may merit consideration, whether the expert assumes causation, or performs analyses around the causal linkage. In a situation where the expert has assumed causation, the courts appear to be more willing and likely to allow that testimony when:
In situations where the expert has specifically opined on causation, and was challenged, the courts appear to be more inclined to allow the testimony when the expert:
The courts appear to be more inclined to allow expert testimony when causation is assumed when there is a ready link between the liability and damage issues, and alternative causes of loss are not evident.
Similarly, the courts appear to be more inclined to admit expert testimony on the causal linkage when the expert demonstrations application of the requisite expertise to the analysis, and has considered other potential causal factors.