What is the legal test for reversal of a jury verdict in a civil case where counsel failed to object to an expert testimony?

counsel did not object to this testimony, and there can be "no satisfactory explanation" for her failure to do so. (People v. Castillo, supra, 16 Cal.4th at p. 1015.)

However, reversal is required only if there is a "'reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.' [Citation.]" (Williams v. Taylor, supra, 529 U.S. at pp. 390-391.)

We find no prejudicial error here. The jury was instructed on how to view lay opinion testimony: "Witnesses, who were not testifying as experts, gave their opinions during trial. You may but are not required to accept those opinions as true or correct. You may give the opinions whatever weight you think appropriate. Consider the extent of the witness's opportunity to perceive the matters on which his or her opinion is based, the reasons the witness gave for any opinion, and the facts or information on which the witness relied in forming that opinion. You must decide whether information on which the witness relied was true and accurate. You may disregard all or any part of an opinion that you find unbelievable, unreasonable, or unsupported by the evidence." (See CALCRIM No. 333.) The jury was also instructed that it was their duty to "decide what the facts are. It is up to all of you, and you alone, to decide what happened . . . ." (See CALCRIM No. 200.) We presume that the jury followed the court's instructions absent evidence to the contrary. (People v. Nguyen (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 28, 37.)