-
Why Sorry is the Badest Word…
An expression of regret or an apology by a Defendant is nothing new when a case doesn’t settle and finally makes it to trial. However, should this be allowed? Why no! Defendants should be prohibited from expressing any apologies or statements of regret to the jury in connection with a civil case not seeking punitive →
-
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 →
-
Impeccable Impeachment and the Use of Prior Convictions
“Trust is not simply a matter of truthfulness, or even constancy. It is also a matter of amity and goodwill. We trust those who have our best interests at heart, and mistrust those who seem deaf to our concerns.” Gary Hamel What are the limitations on the use of prior convictions in challenging a witness’s →
-
Limiting the Damage
So you lose an evidentiary argument and the court allows some potentially prejudicial evidence to be presented for some narrow purpose such as bias, impeachment or to show intent, similar plan, motive or scheme. So what should you do? Indiana follows “the rule of multiple admissibility” endorsed by the evidence treatises of both Whitmore →
-
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. →
-
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. →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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 →
-
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: →
/
Tumblr
/
The Barrister's Toolbox 