/

Tumblr

/

Linkedin

The Barrister’s Toolbox

Category: Rule 102

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
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
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