The Barrister's Toolbox
    • About
    • Have a Question?
  • Home
  • richcooklaw.com

/

Tumblr

/

Linkedin

The Barrister’s Toolbox

Category: experts

  • Does an Oath Inoculate a Medical Witness from Being Biased in Favor of Other Healthcare Providers?

    “Cross-examination is the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” – John Henry Wigmore  The existence of financial bias is a well established area of cross-examination when dealing with the credibility of witnesses and experts alike.  Indiana law is clear that the income of an expert derives from his/her work as an expert →

    Evidence, experts, Rules of Evidence, testimony, Uncategorized

    /

    bias, Cross-examination, finacial bias, impeachment, medical malpractice, Medical Review Panel Members, Oath, Prejudice, Rule 411, Rule 60, Rule 616

    /

    Oct 3, 2017
  • Admissibility and the Burden of Proof are as Different as Apples and Oranges…

    In a recent case, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that a nurse practitioner can provide expert medical testimony in areas previously reserved to only medical doctors.  In the decision from the Indiana Court of Appeals it allowed a Nurse Practitioner to testify as an expert witnesses in a soft-tissue case. See the link below: →

    Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts

    /

    /

    Jun 3, 2017
  • Readying Your Experts for Traps and Tough Questions

    Depositions are dangerous time for your expert.  Dangerous traps lies just around the corner. You cannot relax.  Here are some thoughts on this important topic. 1. Tendencies of your expert: If you can obtain and read past depositions of your expert to see not only what type of questions are asked but how he reacts. →

    depositions, Direct examination, Discovery, dos and don’ts, Evidence, experts, Rule 26, Rule 30, Rule 32, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony, Trial Rules

    /

    Depositions, Discovery, Evidence, expert, preparation, Rule 26, Rule 30, Rule 32

    /

    May 1, 2017
  • Guarding Your Expert from Aggressive Counsel

      Preparation is your greatest tool to avoid problems caused by difficult or agressive attorneys. Ultimately, once you are at the deposition there is little you can do without risking sanctions. Harassing behavior. If an attorney engages in ongoing harassing behavior which is truly beyond the pale, call the magistrate of court and have a →

    depositions, experts, Rule 30, Rule 32, Termination of deposition, Trial Rules

    /

    abusive, expert, Rule 30, Rule 32, Rule 37, sanctions, Termination of deposition

    /

    Apr 23, 2017
  • Getting Your Expert Ready for Court – How to Play the Course and Avoid the Rough.

    What does an Expert Witness Needs to Know About Court Proceedings? Here are some thoughts to keep you expert out of the rough:   1. Review all evidentiary foundations. You should review the appropriate foundational requirements for the admission of any records, tests, or other analysis which is not stipulated to by the opposing party. →

    Direct examination, Evidence, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Mar 9, 2017
  • Expert Witness Reports – Avoiding Litigation Sand Traps – What They Should and Should Not Include

    You have hired an expert and are in need of a report or findings for you expert disclosures. What do you do?  Here is a short checklist of things to consider:   1. Compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. This probably is a good place to start. The Rule provides in pertinent part →

    Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, Rule 26, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, Trial Advocacy, Trial Rules

    /

    /

    Feb 26, 2017
  • Top Mistakes in Choosing Experts

    Here they are…   1. Hiring an expert too late. Experts can be helpful and sometimes essential in properly investigating and evaluating a case. They can provide guidance in drafting discovery  requests and determining whether information has been overlooked, withheld or lost. They are  also invaluable in assisting in deposition preparation and questioning of the →

    Direct examination, Evidence, experts, Rule 102, Rule 615, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, separation of witnesses, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Feb 8, 2017
  • Screen Your Expert and Treat Your Case Right by Avoiding Any Big Tricks…

    An area which is often overlooked is screening your expert. This is important. Treat it like you would a major purchase, because it is.    (a) Review and verify Curriculum Vitae. You can devastate an expert if he lies on his CV. I have done this before with experts who had a long history of →

    exclusion of witnesses, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    Evidence, problems, rule 702, screening expert witnesses

    /

    Jan 28, 2017
  • Setting the Table for Admitting Your Expert’s Testimony.

    To serve your expert’s testimony up to a jury you must consider and establish the following: 1. Qualifications. You need to know precisely what you are using your expert for, and then determine if the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier-of-fact to understand the evidence or to determine a particular →

    Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Jan 21, 2017
  • Proper Objections at Your Expert’s Deposition

      Palais de justice historique de Lyon, France Objections should be kept to a minimum. The Rules contemplate that objections should be concise and afford the examiner the opportunity to cure the objection. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(c)(2) (noting that “objection[s] must be stated concisely”); id., Advisory Committee Notes (1993 Amendments) (noting that “[d]epositions →

    depositions, Direct examination, Discovery, dos and don’ts, Evidence, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, Trial Advocacy, Trial Rules

    /

    /

    Jan 15, 2017
  • Locating the Right Expert… Is It Like Looking for a Needle in a Haystack?

    The right expert can educate and enlighten a jury and help prove your case. Below are some suggestions on how to locate an expert.   (a) Classes of expert witnesses in academia, working professionals, and full time professional experts. These are the three primary areas from which you are  likely to obtain experts in anticipation →

    Evidence, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony

    /

    /

    Jan 14, 2017
  • Expert Witness Retainer Agreements – Striking the Right Deal.

    Here are points to consider: 1. Cannot be a contingent fee arrangement. This is unethical and would be disastrous regardless… enough said. 2. Cost of initial consultation. This should be free or nominal, but make sure this is clear. 3. Definition of scope of work. This should be set out in the initial engagement letter →

    computer, depositions, Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, rule 101, Rule 102, Rule 26, Rules of Evidence, separation of witnesses, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Jan 7, 2017
  • Should I Hire an Expert? Seeing the Light…

    So you think you need to hire an expert? When should you do so? Consider the following: 1. When to Hire. It is usually advantageous to hire an expert as soon as it is clear you will require one. Oftentimes, you will be hired by a client on a moment’s notice to investigate and document the scene →

    Evidence, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony

    /

    /

    Jan 6, 2017
  • Common Knowledge Exception to the Requirement for Expert Testimony in Professional Negligence Cases – Sometimes Its Child’s Play.

    Is the information within the common understanding of the jury?  Rule of Evidence 702 governing expert testimony does not always apply and bar lay testimony on issues which are just plain common sense. In certain instances the answer to whether there was professional negligence is intuitively obvious and needs no explanation by an expert or →

    experts, rule 702, Rules of Evidence, testimony

    /

    /

    Jan 6, 2017
  • Confirmation Bias: Foe of Justice and Truth

       “Confirmation Bias” has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. It is a mindset we all are susceptible to in the way we see the world. ‘Confirmation Bias’ is a psychological phenomenon that explains why people tend to seek out information that confirms their existing opinions and overlook or ignore information that refutes their →

    experts, Jury Selection, rule 702

    /

    confirmation bias, DNA, Innocence Project, JohnGrisham, jury bias, Making a Murder, medical malpractice, Ron Williamson, Steven Avery, The Innocent Man

    /

    Jan 17, 2016
  • How to Exclude Self-Serving Reports by Testimonial Experts

    So you’re at trial and your opponent wants to offer into evidence their expert’s written report… What do you do?  Is it admissible? The short answer is no. Expert’s reports are documents prepared in anticipation of litigation and do not have the inherent reliability of documents typically considered and admissible under exceptions to the hearsay →

    Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts

    /

    Expert Witnesses, hearsay, reports, rule 803(6)

    /

    Nov 5, 2015
  • The Case Against Experts in the Courtroom

    “If you can’t explain it to a six year old, you don’t understand it yourself.” Albert Einstein I have always thought it is unclear whether Indiana Rule of Evidence (IRE) 615 applies to depositions. IRE 101(C) states: Rules Inapplicable. The rules, other than those with respect to privileges, do not apply in the following situations: →

    depositions, Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, rule 101, Rule 102, Rule 26, Rule 30, Rule 32, Rule 43, Rule 615, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, separation of witnesses, testimony, Trial Advocacy, Trial Rules

    /

    Adversarial system, Civil procedure

    /

    Oct 15, 2015

Rich Cook has been practicing law for over 40 years and has been recognized by his peers for his contributions to the development of personal injury law and trial advocacy in the State of Indiana.

Since entering private practice, Rich has handled a wide range of matters involving claims of personal injury, wrongful death, automobile collisions, medical malpractice, product liability, job site injuries, insurance disputes, breach of contract, defamation, sexual harassment claims, civil rights claims, class actions, and construction site injuries.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
 

Loading Comments...
 

    • Subscribe Subscribed
      • The Barrister's Toolbox
      • Join 104 other subscribers
      • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
      • The Barrister's Toolbox
      • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Sign up
      • Log in
      • Report this content
      • View site in Reader
      • Manage subscriptions
      • Collapse this bar