Braylon Seifert v. Kay M. Balink, M.D.

¶ 258.

DANIEL KELLY, J.

(dissenting.) I dissent, respectfully, because we missed an opportunity to clarify the standards for admission of expert testimony. This lack of clarity caused us to affirm the *637admission of testimony that does not satisfy the requirements of Wis. Stat. § 907.02 (2013-14).1

¶ 259. I agree with the lead opinion that an expert's personal experience can qualify him as an expert under Wis. Stat. § 907.02, making his testimony sufficiently "reliable" for admission to the jury. But that just begs the question: In light of that personal experience, to what is the admitted expert…