Gibson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that witness’s testimony that he “believed” a substance was asbestos was insufficient to establish that asbestos existed in the workplace.
• holding that Rule 701 contemplates admission of lay opinions based on personal knowledge and which are helpful to the trier of fact
• holding that to be competent and admissible, a witness’s testimony must be based on their first-hand knowledge
• holding that lay opinion testimony on the technical subject of asbestos in the workplace was inadmissible, when the witness failed to demonstrate sufficient personal experience or technical knowledge to qualify him to offer an opinion
• noting that a lay witness may provide a technical opinion regarding asbestos in the workplace based upon “either formal education or practical experience”
• noting that a lay witness may provide a technical opinion regarding asbestos in the workplace based upon “either formal education or practical experience”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Gibson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Gibson v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2006-04-06· cited 1×