Brinegar v. Robertson Corp.

I concur completely with Judge Miller's opinion on the Issues One and Three. I concur in result as to Issue Two for the reasons hereinafter stated.

In discussing the admissibility of expert testimony, Judge Miller appears to follow the archaic rule that for expert testimony to be admitted, the subject must be beyond the range of common knowledge and experience. I cannot accept this view of the law.

In Summers v. State (1986), Ind.App., 495 N.E.2d 799, we laid the holding of the older cases to rest in favor of the modern view that expert testimony is admissible if the witness is qualified by…