With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". asserted custom. It is well established that “ ‘an expert’s opinion is of no greater probative value than the soundness of his reasons given therefor will warrant.’ ” Surkovich v. Doub, 258 Md. 263, 272, 265 A.2d 447, 451 (1970) (quoting Miller v. Abrahams, 239 Md. 263, 273, 211 A.2d 309, 314 (1965)). An expert opinion ‘derives its probative force from the facts on which it is predicated, and these must be legally sufficient to sustain the opinion of the expert.’ State Health Dep’t v. Walker, 238 Md. 512, 520, 209 A.2d 555, 559 (1965). See also Jones v. State, 343 Md. 448, 682 A.2d 248 (1996) (expert testimony by police officer that he was able to identify crack cocaine by touch was nothing more than a conclusion); Beatty v. Trailmaster Prods., Inc., 330 Md. 726, 625 A.2d 1005 (1993) (<HOLDING>); Wood v. Toyota Motor Corp., 134 Md.App. 512,

A: holding that a reliable differential diagnosis alone may provide a valid foundation for a causation opinion even when no epidemiological studies peerreviewed published studies animal studies or laboratory data are offered in support of the opinion
B: holding that an expert opinion on a question of law is inadmissible
C: holding that an experts opinion must be based on facts in evidence or within his or her knowledge and that the admission of an experts opinion is reviewed for an abuse of discretion
D: holding inadmissible auto reconstruction experts opinion that height of bumper on truck was unreasonably dangerous where height complied with industry standards and no scientific studies or emerging consensus supported opinion
D.