their responsibilities. He explained how they were supposed to use the electronic transit device; each step that the operator of the device, Mr. Davis, was required to take; what each step was expected to achieve; what they could do to double-check their results; and what the result should have been if they performed as anticipated. This testimony was sufficient to establish the standard of care. State v. Linney, 138 N.C. App. 169, 183, 531 S.E.2d 245, 256 (“whether or not a witness has been formally tendered as an expert is not controlling” if the witness may appropriately be considered an expert based on qualifications), disc. review dismissed and appeal dismissed, 352 N.C. 595, 545 S.E.2d 214 (2000). See also Noell v. Kosanin, 119 N.C. App. 191, 196, 457 S.E.2d 742, 745 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, expert testimony “ ‘is not required
holding expert testimony is generally required to establish proximate cause in medical malpractice cases holding that allowing the statute of limitations to run on the clients claim is an example of obvious malpractice that does not require expert testimony to establish a standard of care holding that defendant moving for summary judgment in a legal malpractice claim need not present expert testimony establishing a standard of care even though a plaintiff in that position would need to do so because the case law establishing the plaintiffs duty to provide expert testimony cannot fairly be characterized as applying to a defendants motion under rule 56 holding expert testimony is ordinarily required in legal malpractice cases to establish the standard of care holding expert testimony not required to defeat summary judgment in medical malpractice suit because defendant doctors admissions were sufficient to establish the standard of care