is required to establish standard for business customs brokerage which demands specialized knowledge and skill to determine appropriate classification of customer's products); and Burgess v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 841 P.2d 325, 329 (Colo.App.1992)(using expert testimony of customary investigation procedures for determining appropriate medical treatment to establish that the insurer acted in bad faith when it declined coverage). 15 . See Gerrity, 946 P.2d at 932-33 (notification to surface owner and removal or burial of materials 'is not a technical matter requiring evidence of industry practice," nor does tort of trespass require expert testimony of material interference with surface uses to establish prima facie case); Palmer v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc., 684 P.2d 187, 210 (Colo.1984) (<HOLDING>); Hartman v. Community Responsibility Ctr.,
holding that no specialized skill or distinctive knowledge was needed to represent an alien at asylum and withholding of deportation hearings holding that daubert applies not only to testimony based on scientific knowledge but also to testimony based on technical and other specialized knowledge holding that the judge and jury may rely upon common knowledge and experience without proof holding that the standard of care applicable to a reasonable pharmaceutical company marketing product after minimum testing and without a warning does not entail specialized knowledge or skill unique to a scientific discipline and beyond the knowledge and experience of the average jury holding that the knowledge requisite to knowing violation of a statute is factual knowledge as distinguished from knowledge of the law