§6641

gal conclusions contained in a report prepared by Mr. Wilgus. - 65 - v. Laeisz, 896 F.2d 964, 967-968 (5th Cir. 1990); Twin City Plaza, Inc. v. Central Sur. & Ins. Corp., 409 F.2d 1195, 1200 (8th Cir. 1969); Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure, sec. 6641, at 251-252 (Interim ed. 1992). An expert may base an opinion or inference on facts that the expert knows from first hand observation, that are in the record and made known to the expert, or that, although not in the record, are "of a type re

ions, however, is inadmissible conjecture or speculation. See Randolph v. Laeisz, 896 F.2d 964, 967-968 (5th Cir. 1990); Twin City Plaza, Inc. v. Central Sur. & Ins. Corp., 409 F.2d 1195, 1200 (8th Cir. 1969); Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure, sec. 6641, at 251-252 (interim ed. 1992). An expert may base an opinion or inference on facts that the expert knows from firsthand observation, that are in the record and made known to the expert, or that, although not in the record, are “of a type r

gal conclusions contained in a report prepared by Mr. Wilgus. - 65 - v. Laeisz, 896 F.2d 964, 967-968 (5th Cir. 1990); Twin City Plaza, Inc. v. Central Sur. & Ins. Corp., 409 F.2d 1195, 1200 (8th Cir. 1969); Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure, sec. 6641, at 251-252 (Interim ed. 1992). An expert may base an opinion or inference on facts that the expert knows from first hand observation, that are in the record and made known to the expert, or that, although not in the record, are "of a type re