by Kathy Fortune M.D.

Created on: November 02, 2009

One must clearly understand what to expect from an expert witness in order to make an intelligent hiring decision. Here are a few tips.

An expert witness has specialized knowledge and understanding in a particular field. The expert's purpose is to assist the judge or jury in understanding the evidence or to assist them in determining the facts of the case. The function of the expert is to convey the consensus views of his/her profession relative to the matter at hand.

No witness is an expert witness until accepted to testify by the presiding judge. Professionals must qualify at each court appearance. There is no carry-over.

Experts should not take a case unless they have extensive knowledge and expertise with the subject matter that will be addressed in court.

No expert will be completely supportive of a case. If so, the conclusions should be questioned. Rarely is there a case where the facts are to the benefit of only one side. Honest witnesses have more credibility with the judge and jurors.

Although the attorney will ask the expert to serve as an unbiased witness, everyone recognizes that totally unbiased experts do not exist, but the expert must make the effort. Famed attorney Melvin Belli was quoted as saying, "If I got myself an impartial witness, I'd think I was wasting my money."

According to the ethics code of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL), the expert has a mandate to strive for objectivity in an opinion. Article IV of the ethic code states: Although experts may be retained by one party to a dispute in a civil matter or the defense or prosecution in a criminal matter, they should adhere to the principle of honesty and should strive for objectivity.

The expert should work in consultation and at the direction of the attorney such that the expert's work may be included under the attorney's work product doctrine, in case the attorney decides not to use the doctor as an expert.

All experts should be initially retained as a consultant, with the option of being used as an expert, until the attorney knows the professional's opinion. If the attorney designates the doctor as an expert, then negative opinions and information could be disclosed to the opposing side.

It is never advisable for the treating physician to serve as the primary expert witness for a patient. Some would argue that a treating doctor's role is to be helpful to the client and if negative information is discussed, the therapeutic relationship could

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>