New Standards for Expert-Witness Disclosures
Thomas P. Branigan and Tina Georgieva Federal Rule of Evidence 702 governs the admission of expert testimony.
A Year in Review: Applying the Amended Expert Rules
Christina D. Riggs Welcome changes to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure took effect on December 1, 2010. It was universally anticipated that the amendments to Rule 26 would eliminate certain unnecessary expert discovery battles and open the door for more meaningful and extensive expert-witness practice.
'Hybrid Witnesses'and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26
Andrea Mahady Price and Kristin L. Beckman Treating physicians provide useful factual testimony about their diagnosis and treatment of plaintiffs alleging an illness or injury.
Winning the "Battle of the Experts" While Keeping Fees under Control
Lynn S. McCreary and David R. Singh Whether opining on liability, causation, or damages, expert witnesses can make or break your case. The outcome of trial often hinges upon the likeability, credibility, and communication skills of one or more star expert witnesses.
Ethical Preparation of Witnesses for Deposition and Trial
Erin C. Asborno James Fenimore Cooper originated the phrase "horse-shedding the witness," referring to attorneys who lingered in carriage sheds near the old courthouse in White Plains, New York, to rehearse their witnesses.
Early Case Assessment: Get Experts Involved From Day One
Lisa Pierce Reisz and David V. Dilenschneider Early case assessment. It's a hot phrase right now amongst litigators, and although it's been defined in many different ways, it essentially boils down to gathering information, conducting research, and performing other tasks early on in litigation, when it often matters most.
Expert Testimony Admissibility after Wal-Mart v. Dukes
Dennis S. Ellis, Katherine F. Murray, and Nicholas J. Begakis In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court ushered in uncertainty regarding the standard for admissibility of expert testimony at the class certification stage.
Federal Rule of Evidence 706: Court-Appointed Experts
John P. McCahey and Jonathan M. Proman Expert testimony is often central to the outcome of a trial. And a litigator is almost never surprised when the trial expert he or she retained—whether a scientific expert, business expert, or some other expert—reaches conclusions favorable to the litigator’s client.
Is Your Expert Your Ally or Your Enemy?
Mark E. Porada When lawyers retain experts in litigation, it is fair to say they expect those experts to help their cases, not hurt them. Usually, a lawyer has a hand in guiding an expert in what to say in a report; sometimes lawyers actually prepare those reports themselves and the parties agree that the preliminary back-and-forth drafts are not discoverable.
Rules Governing Experts: The European Perspective
James R. Tumbridge, Timothy D. Pecsenye, and Gregory J. Urbanchuk In the United States, the use of expert testimony is a routine and well-defined part of the litigation landscape.
Gregory P. Joseph Taking testimony from adverse experts is a tricky proposition—extracting what you want and bottling up what you don’t. Experts are advocates.
Gregory P. Joseph Experts are dangerous. Not just the other side’s experts—yours. Every note they take, every draft and document they write and every email or phone call they share with you may be discoverable.