A plaintiff has brought an action for personal injuries against a store, in connection with an incident in which he slipped and fell after the store's linoleum floors had been mopped. A major issue at trial is the degree of moisture that remained on the floor, because it had been mopped 45 minutes before the plaintiff walked on it. The store offers the testimony of an expert, who will testify about an experiment he conducted measuring the amount of time necessary for a linoleum floor to dry completely after having been mopped. Under what condition should the court admit this testimony

It is shown that the conditions of the expert's experiment were substantially similar to the conditions of the store's floor when the plaintiff slipped.

Explanation:

The condition under which the court should admit the testimony is that it is shown that the conditions of the expert's experiment were substantially similar to the conditions of the store's floor when the plaintiff slipped.

The testimony of the expert will only be relevant and applicable of it was similar to the scenario which led to the accident. In such case, it will be admissible if it's relevant.

As long as the conditions of the experiment of the expert replicated the conditions regarding the accident, then the experiment is said to be relevant.

answer:

the foreign corrupt practices act of 1977, as amended, 15 u.s.c. §§ 78dd-1, et seq. ("fcpa"), was enacted for the purpose of making it unlawful for certain classes of persons and entities to make payments to foreign government officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business

explanation: