therefore, can be use atory language of the statutory provision requires the admission of the opinion in its entirety, regardless of its |incontent. In support thereof, the defense cited this Court’s holding in Galloway that the panel’s opinion and findings “are admissible by virtue of the statutory provision, La. R.S. 40:1299.47(H), and the statutory scheme put in place by the [MMA],” 602 So.2d at 1007, as well as the Second and Fourth Circuit cases rendered in reliance therewith. See Hunter v. Bossier Medical Center, 31,026, p. 13 (La.App. 2 Cir. 9/25/98), 718 So.2d 636, 644 (“the clear language of that statute makes the report of the MRP admissible at trial, even where ‘technical’ defects exist”); Beaucoudray v. Walsh, 07-0818, p. 21 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/12/09), 9 So.3d 916, 927 (<HOLDING>), writ denied, 09-0832 (La.5/29/09), 9 So.3d
holding a simple reading of la rs 40129947h mandates the admissibility of the mrp opinion holding as to the admissibility of prior bad acts that allegedly took place fourteen and twelve years before the acts alleged in that case that the lapse of time between the defendants sexual acts    goes to the weight of the evidence not to its admissibility holding that the admissibility of expert testimony was governed by state law holding the mandatory language of larevstat  40129947h presupposes the validity of the opinion itself holding that once an expert has passed rule 702s threshold of admissibility lingering questions or controversy concerning the quality of the experts conclusions go to the weight of the testimony rather than its admissibility