While direct examination is not as emotionally challenging as cross-examination, direct examination is often more difficult for an expert to excel at than cross. During direct examination, the expert must explain material that may be highly complex or dry to a lay audience -- the jury. The expert must do so persuasively, but without appearing [...]
By: Jessica Mahon Scoles, Esq. An expert witness who will be testifying, whether it is at deposition or trial, should be prepared to deal with these 10 routine areas of inquiry. 1. Bias Experts will be cross-examined about their real or imagined bias. Counsel who can demonstrate or raise doubts about the expert’s bias can [...]
We at SEAK are often asked by new experts should I get some expert witness training before accepting cases. The short answer is yes. As an expert witness you will be expected by counsel who is retaining you to be conversant and familiar with many aspects of expert witness practice. Technically, anyone can usually [...]
Hi, my name is Steve Babitsky. I'm the President of SEAK, and I'm here today with Attorney James Mangraviti from SEAK. We're going to be talking about a curriculum vitae for expert witnesses. Jim, why is it important for expert witnesses to have a curriculum vitae or CV? Jim Mangraviti: A very simple reason, you're [...]
Steven Babitsky, Esq. Many successful expert witnesses have viable and profitable businesses. The desire to “keep at it” often prevents experts from forming a viable succession plan. In fact, well thought out succession plans often enable expert witnesses to continue working, be more selective in their assignments, and provide income when they do decide to [...]
By Steven Babitsky, Esq. Expert witnesses of all specialties are facing an increasing numbers of Daubert challenges. The admissibility rate varies by area of expertise. Physicians, when testifying in certain areas, have approximately a 50% exclusion rate with many financial experts (fraud 52% and intellectual property 51%) a little higher.[1] What can and should expert [...]
The state of Wyoming follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Wise v. Ludlow, 346 P.3d 1 (Wyo. 2015). Under this test, the court should ensure that expert testimony is reliable and “fits the facts of the particular case.” Id. Additionally, the focus of this test is on the “methodology [...]
The state of Wisconsin follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. State v. Giese, 854 N.W.2d 687 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). This rule finds expert witness testimony admissible if it is “based upon sufficient facts or data, the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and the witness [...]
The state of West Virginia follows the Daubert test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. San Francisco v. Wendy’s Intern., Inc., 656 S.E.2d 734 (W. Va. 2007). Under this test, the court asks: “(1) is the witness an expert; and, if so, (2) is the expert’s testimony relevant and reliable?” Id. To determine [...]
The district of Washington, D.C. follows the Frye test for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Jones v. U.S., 27 A.3d 1130 (D.C. Cir. 2011). Under this test, expert testimony is not admissible unless it has “gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” Id. However, general acceptance “does not require [...]