COMPENSATION 117 



ices.*^ It is to be presumed, however, that attor- 

 neys would be much better able to testify as to the 

 facts of usage than the layman, and for that reason 

 it has also been held that laymen are not compe- 

 tent witnesses in such a matter.^'^ Also, it has been 

 held that a defendant, if not an attorney, is incom- 

 petent as a witness as to the value of a lawyer's 

 services.^^ It has also been held that the usage in 

 the ordinary place of business of a consultant, 

 rather than that where services are rendered, 

 should govern; for in the absence of an agreement 

 beforehand the consultant has a right to expect 

 to receive his usual fee. So, "A lawyer residing 

 in another state, where another lawyer resides, 

 is competent to testify as to the value of the legal 

 services rendered by the latter, rather than an at- 

 torney living in such latter state. ' ' ^^ 



88. Definition and Scope of Expert Testimony. 

 The following rules, taken from ' ' The Law of Ex- 

 pert and Opinion Evidence," by Lawson (1900), 

 give the facts so clearly and concisely that they 

 are here quoted. 



''Rule 35.^° An expert is a person having spe- 

 cial knowledge and skill in. the particular calling 

 to which the inquiry relates. ' ' 



''Rule 36.^^ Therefore, to render the opinion 

 of a witness admissible on the ground that it is 

 the opinion of an expert, the witness must have 



46 Hart V. Vidal, 6 Cal. 56. 49 Stanberry v. Diekerson, 35 



47 McNiel V. Davidson, 37 Iowa 493. 

 Ind. 336. 60 p. 229. 



48 Howell V. Smith, 108 Mich. si p. 231. 

 350, 66 N. W. 218. 



