Texas Surveyors Practice Exam

What distinguishes a lay witness from an expert witness?

1. A lay witness provides opinions while an expert presents facts

2. A lay witness testifies to facts; an expert provides professional expertise

3. An expert witness must have firsthand knowledge, while a lay witness does not

4. Expert witnesses are always compensated for their testimony, but lay witnesses are not

The correct answer is: A lay witness testifies to facts; an expert provides professional expertise

The distinction between a lay witness and an expert witness primarily revolves around the nature of their testimony and the type of knowledge they bring to a legal proceeding. A lay witness testifies based on personal knowledge or experience, offering observations and recounting facts they have directly witnessed or experienced. In contrast, an expert witness is called upon to provide specialized knowledge and professional insight that goes beyond common understanding. Expert witnesses can interpret complex data, analyze technical details, or explain specific concepts within their field, thus assisting the court in understanding issues that require expert analysis. While the other options touch on aspects of this distinction, they do not capture the key difference effectively. For instance, the notion that an expert witness must have firsthand knowledge while a lay witness does not is misleading since both types of witnesses can provide testimony based on their personal experiences, albeit from different contexts. Similarly, while compensation may be true for expert witnesses, it is not a defining factor that distinguishes lay witnesses from experts in terms of the nature of the testimony they provide. Hence, the focus on the ability of lay witnesses to provide factual testimony while experts supply professional expertise highlights the core difference between the two roles in legal contexts.