Opinion ID: 1197869
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Whether the district court erroneously admitted lay opinion

Text: The district court allowed Paul's friend, McCloud, to give her opinion regarding the cause of Paul's fall. Imperial argues that the court abused its discretion in allowing this lay opinion. NRS 50.265 limits the opinion testimony of non-experts to opinions or inferences which are: 1. Rationally based on the perception of the witness; and 2. Helpful to a clear understanding of his testimony or the determination of a fact in issue. McCloud heard Paul's foot slip, saw the end of Paul's fall, and then saw oil on the rug where Paul fell. We conclude that her opinion was rationally based on her perceptions and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the opinion was helpful to the jury.