Opinion ID: 901011
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Whether the amortization is admissible as an expert opinion.

Text: [¶ 34.] Finally, the amortization might be admissible if it qualifies as an expert opinion. SDCL 19-15-2 states: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise. Scotts have absolutely failed to prove that the Repp amortization is expert opinion, therefore, the amortization is not admissible as an expert opinion. [¶ 35.] Scotts have altogether failed to meet their burden. They have neither set forth an allegation of loss or destruction of the original documents nor have they shown any degree of diligence in the search for the original documents. Without such a showing, Scotts cannot rely on the exception for lost or destroyed documents. Scotts have also failed to establish any other basis for the admissibility of the amortization schedule. [¶ 36.] As a result, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in making its evidentiary ruling that the amortization schedule was inadmissible. The trial court's evidentiary ruling is affirmed.