Also known as: hypothetical question · hypotheticals · hypothetical · expert hypotheticals
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A method of eliciting expert opinion testimony by presenting the witness with a series of assumed facts and requesting an opinion based on those facts.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Hannah Hale challenged a long-dormant municipal ordinance in federal court. Her attorney called an expert on local enforcement practices and posed a series of hypothetical questions describing various enforcement scenarios. The expert opined that no realistic threat of prosecution existed under the facts presented.
Hector Hernandez attacked a speech regulation as facially overbroad. Counsel asked an expert on protected expression a chain of hypothetical questions about the statute's potential applications to various forms of protected conduct. The expert's answers helped demonstrate that the law swept in only a modest amount of protected speech relative to its legitimate reach.
Harper Hill sought punitive damages against an insurer. Her lawyer presented an economics expert with hypothetical questions outlining different ratios of compensatory to punitive awards and asked for opinions on constitutional reasonableness. The responses guided the jury's evaluation of the award's excessiveness.
Hope Howard raised a free-exercise defense to a criminal charge. Defense counsel asked a religious-studies expert hypothetical questions about the centrality of certain practices to the defendant's faith. The expert's answers supported the sincerity element of the claim.
Hassan Hakim sued a tobacco company and offered an expert on federal labeling requirements. Counsel posed hypothetical questions describing various state-law claims and asked whether they would conflict with federal standards. The expert's responses addressed the scope of preemption.
Hakim Hall sued a therapist for failure to warn. Plaintiff's counsel asked a mental-health expert hypothetical questions detailing different patient statements and asked whether each would trigger a duty to protect third parties. The expert's answers helped establish the standard of care.
They ensured the jury understood the precise factual basis for the expert's opinion and prevented the jury from assuming unproven facts were true merely because the expert discussed them.
No. Rule 705 permits an expert to state an opinion without first disclosing the underlying facts or data, though those facts may be explored on cross-examination.
They often became lengthy and complex, consuming substantial time and risking confusion or distraction from the actual evidence in the case.
…such an unusual exercise of government power would certainly raise a suspicion that a private purpose was afoot,[^maj-17] the hypothetical cases posited by petitioners can be confronted if and when they arise.[^maj-18] They do not warrant the crafting of an artificial restriction on the concept of public…