Expert Witness Blog

Family law expert witness David Pollock testified in Donna Moonda's murder trial that she would have received between $1.2 million and $1.6 million in a divorce settlement and more than $3million if her husband died. Moonda, a former nurse, faces death penaly charges in the death of her 69-year-old physician husband. Prosecutors accuse her of conspiring with drug dealer Damian Bradford to collect an inheritance.

The defendant originally gave authorities a description of the gunman, who would have been much smaller than Bradford. A psychology expert witness is expected to testify about how common it is for witnesses at a traumatic event to wrongly recall details and descriptions, as reported in The Tribune Chronicle.

Many expert witnesses do not realize that they can file suit against the law firm that retained the expert if the expert is sued for negligence.

In the 2005 California case of Forensis Group, Inc. v. Frantz, Townsend & Foldenauer, an expert witness was sued for professional negligence for his work in a wrongful death case involving a forklift. The law firm Frantz, Townsend & Foldenauer sued the forklift manufacturer on behalf of the family and retained a mechanical engineering expert witness. At his deposition, the expert did not identify any applicable safety standards, but when the manufacturer later moved for summary judgment, the expert stated in a declaration that the vehicle failed several safety standards. The court granted summary judgment, noting that the expert had contradicted himself. The family filed a malpractice suit against the law firm, and the expert. The expert cross-claimed against the law firm for equitable indemnity, alleging that because he was retained by the law firm, the lawyers should share the loss attributable to the expert's unsuccessful opposition to the motion for summary judgment. The expert charged that the lawyers had not provided him with adequate information, had failed to rehabilitate him at his deposition, and had failed to brief the court on the law regarding the admissibility of evidence regarding industry standards.

Continue reading "Expert Witnesses Can Both Sue and Be Sued" »

The SEC's civil fraud case against former Qwest chief executive Joe Nacchio will most likely not go to trial until 2009. The SEC asserts that Nacchio and other former Qwest officials falsely inflated revenue by $3 billion from 1999 to 2002. U.S. Magistrate Judge Craig Shaffer gave the parties until Oct. 15, 2008, to submit information on proposed expert witnesses. The judge said he does not expect to allow depositions of the securities expert witnesses. As reported in the Denver Post, the SEC plans to file a motion for summary judgment against Nacchio in August, asking that Nacchio be found guilty of all or part of the charges.

Nacchio, already convicted of illegal insider trading for stock sales from April to May 2001, is scheduled to be sentenced July 27 on his criminal conviction on 19 counts of illegal insider trading.

Thinking about becoming an expert witness? A logical first step is to figure out your area of expertise. Slate.com writes:

According to the Federal Rules of Evidence, an expert witness can be anyone with special "knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education." An expert can testify under the following conditions: The testimony must be based on sufficient facts or data; the testimony must be the product of reliable principles and methods; and the witness must have applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. In general, expert witnesses are called in when "scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue."

Always keep in mind that an expert witness must pass the Daubert test. Trial judges evaluate expert witnesses to determine whether their testimony is relevant and reliable. You must demonstrate that the evidence you present as an expert fits the facts of the case and your conclusions were derived from scientific methods.

The National Ground Water Association is hosting the 5th Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference in Dublin, OH, on July 24-25, 2007. Lawyers and environmental expert witness speakers will cover groundwater litigation cases and forensic environmental investigations. Topics for day two will include new water law regulations, groundwater models, risk assessment, ethics for attorneys and expert witnesses, and a mock trial. The NGWA website states:

The first four of these conferences have been outstanding as a direct result of lawyers and expert witnesses who became part of the process providing excellent quality presentations including trial reenactments.

The 2007 NGWA Ground Water Expo and Annual Meeting will take place in Orlando, Florida, December 4-7. The educational program ranges from drilling operations to professional development and numerous networking opportunities.

As a practicing lawyer, clients may scrutinize every expense and hour you bill in their case. The key to avoiding billing surprises with your clients is to communicate your billing practices. While money has to be considered in hiring an expert witness, it is not the best place to cut costs. Advise your client not to expect experts to discount their fees. A good expert witness is not a bargain expert witness.

Expert witnesses have the education, training, and experience that makes them knowledgeable in their field. While it is understandable that clients want to keep litigation costs to a minimun, in order to win their case, it is advisable not to cut expert witness costs.

Gang expert witness Ray Villalvazo testified Friday on the rivalry between two Asian gangs in Fresno which led to death of 20-year-old Nath Ouch and her unborn child. As reported in The FresnoBee:

When Asian Boyz gang members unleashed a hail of more than 30 bullets into a southeast Fresno apartment complex parking lot in January 2006, it was the "ultimate response" to earlier drive-by shootings by members of the rival Tiny Rascal Gang. "It sent a strong message to say to the rival gang, 'Don't mess with us,' " expert witness Villalvazo said in Fresno County Superior Court. That message also put a bullet in the back of Nath Ouch, who was eight months pregnant. Both Ouch and her unborn child died. Prosecutor Jon Skiles says the Asian Boyz gang members fired bullets at the apartment complex because they knew it was a hangout for members of the Tiny Rascal Gang.

Villalvazo estimated there are 50 members of the Asian Boyz gang in Fresno. Asked about the gang's "primary activities," he listed a series of criminal practices: "Possession of firearms, firing at residences, attempted murder, homicide, vandalism, intimidating witnesses, just to name a few," he said. When people join the gang -- at ages as young as 12 or 13 -- they're called "new booty" and have to earn their stripes, Villalvazo said. To accomplish that, he said, they "do dirt." Translation: They commit crimes. More crimes earn gang members more respect, Villalvazo said

Ivory J. Webb Jr., a sheriff's deputy in San Bernardino County, says he was justified in shooting an unarmed man at the end of a car chase. Webb is charged with attempted voluntary manslaughter and assault with a firearm. Law enforcement and police procedures expert witness Kent Ferrin told the jury that he was convinced Webb shot Elio Carrion because Webb believed Carrion had lunged at him. The defense expert witness, an 18-year police veteran, was cross-examined for more than four hours in the San Bernadino Superior Court case. The DailyBulletin.com reported:

"He felt that his life was in danger," Ferrin testified. "He discharged his weapon at Mr. Carrion because he felt his life was in danger." However, a videotape of the Jan. 29, 2006, shooting appears to show Webb shoot Carrion as Carrion followed the deputy's orders to "get up" off the ground. Closing arguments are expected by June 26.

A human resources expert witness's presentation helped convince a Berkshire County, MA, jury to award $2 million to a former Wal-Mart pharmacist. Plaintiff Cynthia Haddad claimed she was paid less than male pharmacists and was fired in retaliation for complaining.

Massachusetts Lawyer Weekly reports that after more than 10 years at the Pittsfield Wal-Mart, Haddad complained that the retail giant laid her off after she asked to be paid the same as her male counterparts. The company paid her a bonus and then fired her two weeks later. Wal-Mart said the pharmacist was laid off because she left the pharmacy unattended during a period in which an authorized prescription was written by a technician. The jury also heard from North Andover attorney Julie A. Moore, an employment expert witness.

When A. Bernard Ackerman, MD, a New York dermatopathology expert witness, is hired, he refuses to know which side the lawyer represents in the case. Ackerman's goal is to keep his presentation of the facts and opinion objective. PointofLaw.com writes:

"I want to let the facts speak for themselves," said Dr. Ackerman, who has testified equally for the defense and the plaintiff in medical liability cases and in other cases where medical expertise is needed, such as criminal cases. Sticking to the facts, he says, prevents a cross-examining lawyer from tripping him up about his opinion being consistent.... States in recent years have ratcheted up efforts to rein in false medical expert witnesses. They have adopted legislation requiring experts to be qualified or have stepped up state medical board oversight over who testifies and what they say.

Brain Meehan, Director of DNA Security Inc., is often called upon as an expert witness . Unfortunately, the DNA expert witness lost some credibility when his testimony was criticized in Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong's disbarment hearing. As reported in The News & Observer:

Lawyers on both sides and the panel chairman criticized his testimony during the hearing. From the moment Meehan stepped down through the end of the hearing, Williamson derided the scientist's testimony, referring to him as "Mr. Obfuscation" and calling the scientist an "erratic witness at best." Even Nifong's attorney stated that "I wouldn't make much out of what Dr. Meehan said." Meehan can expect those comments to come up when he's cross-examined in any future cases.

In Oliveira v. Bridgestone, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41407, the Northern District of Georgia court ruled to exclude the testimony of the plaintiffs' liability expert witness, Jon M. Crate. The plaintiffs allege that the right rear tire of their vehicle suffered a blowout due to a defect in the tire and caused an accident resulting in serious injury. They charge Bridgestone with (1) strict liability, (2) negligence, (3) misrepresentation, and (4) breach of warranty. Expert witness Crate testified on the cause of the tire blowout and the resultant vehicle rollover. The blowout, according to Crate, was caused by tread separation due to a defect in the tire. However, Bridgestone argued that the plaintiffs' expert witness had a general background in polymer chemistry, materials failure, and metallurgy, but was not qualified to render expert witness testimony about tire failure and tread separation since he has no special education or experience in that particular field.

The court upheld the defendants' motion to exclude the testimony of Jon M. Crate.

A career as an expert witness can be monetarily rewarding but it is not for everyone states Rosalie Hamilton of Expert Communications, a business development firm for expert witnesses. Hamilton wants those who are considering becoming an expert witness as a second career to realize that "litigation is a high-stress production...Getting grilled in deposition, and then cross-examined in court before a judge and jury, can redefine stress!" As reported in eMediaWire:

According to Black's Law Dictionary, an expert witness is a person who through education or experience has developed skill or knowledge in a particular subject, so that he or she may form an opinion that will assist the fact-finder. Fortunately, most of the work of an expert consultant is prior to or exclusive of courtroom testimony. Experts are used to investigate, evaluate, educate, or render an opinion, in written and/or oral format -- activities that assist attorneys, insurers, judges, and juries to determine the facts in a claim, lawsuit, or other dispute. And some expert consultants confine themselves to activities other than testimony, such as reviewing potential medical malpractice cases to determine whether the case should be litigated.

Hamilton gives this advice, "Do your research, learn what it's really like (in real life, not television), and then decide if it's right for you."

Leuren Moret, independent scientist and international expert on radiation and public health issues, will address the Vancouver 9/11 Truth Conference on June 22-24, 2007. Moret, expert witness at the 2004 Tokyo International Tribunal for War Crimes in Afghanistan, will speak on the public health risk posed by the use of depleted uranium (DU) weapons by the U.S. military forces in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. Environmental expert witness Moret reported elevated radiation readings downwind from the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001. Two days after 9/11, the EPA confirmed that the crash site rubble was radioactive and that it was probably depleted uranium (DU) contaminating the Pentagon crash site rubble, as reported in the Online Journal.

The demonstrated public health effects of depleted uranium (DU) weapons include: diabetes; cancer; birth defects; chronic diseases caused by neurological and neuromuscular radiation damage; mitochondrial diseases (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Lou Gehrig’s Disease, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s; heart and brain disorders); global DNA damage in men’s sperm; infertility in women; learning disabilities such as autism, and dyslexia; mental illness; infant mortality and low birth weights; Increase in death rates and decrease in birth rates.

In a high profile property tax case, the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board ruled in favor of West Tisbury, MA assessors. The Tax Board found that William W. Graham was not owed the $300,000 tax relief he sought. The ruling depended in large part on the report of the assessors' real estate appraisal expert witness while the board dismissed testimony from Mr. Graham's expert witness saying that he lacked experience necessary in the case.

The board ordered West Tisbury assessors to reimburse Mr. Graham a total of approximately $5,000 as reported in the Martha's Vineyard Gazette.

Edith Delgado has pleaded not guilty to three counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence. An eye witness and an expert witness for the defense testified Friday that Delgado was traveling just 70 miles per hour last July when she struck an SUV on U.S. Highway 101 resulting in the deaths of three people. The prosecution's claims that Delgado, 19, was driving between 80 and 90 mph when she sideswiped a Ford Explorer. The accident took the lives of Tonga's Prince Tu'ipelehake, 54, Princess Kaimana Tu'ipelehake, 45, and the driver of the Explorer, Vinisia Hefa.

Chris Kauderer, traffic-accident reconstruction expert witness, used accident simulation software to show that Delgado was traveling at 70 mph. Eyewitnesses claimed that Delgado was driving closer to 80 mph and seemed to be racing a black Cadillac Escalade.

Expert witness Kauderer contradicted the testimony of John Daly, an accident-reconstruction expert witness for the prosecution who testified earlier in the week that it was impossible to tell how fast the Mustang was traveling, reports InsideBayArea.com.

A Jones County, MS, jury decided against a couple’s claim that dioxins from the DuPont Co.’s plant on the Gulf Coast were responsible for the death of their daughter. Kerman and Naomi Ladner of DeLisle filed a lawsuit claiming that their daughter's liver cancer and heart problems were caused by dioxins released from DuPont’s plant. The DeLisle facility is the second-largest titanium dioxide maker in the country.

DuPont called several environmental expert witnesses to rebut claims made by the plaintiffs. Expert witness testimony led the Jones County jury to find that DuPont “negligently released dioxins and arsenic from the DeLisle facility” but did not link the release to the death of the Ladners’ daughter reports The Laurel Leader-Call.

Worcester, MA police officer Heriberto Arroyo was convicted June 7th in U.S. District Court on two conspiracy drug charges. Arroyo was found guilty of conspiracy to possess GBL and GHB and conspiracy to possess Ecstasy and cocaine. GHB is widely believed to be used primarily for drugging women for purposes of sexual assault. Each conviction carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison. Prosecutors called three expert witnesses on GBL and GHB, which weightlifters and party-goers use. No law enforcement expert witnesses were called.

The jury found Patrolman Arroyo not guilty of conspiracy to possess GHB and GBL with intent to distribute, which carries a maximum 20 year sentence reports Telegram.com.

Flawed testimony by a state expert witness led to a new trial for Julie Amero, the Norwich substitute teacher accused of surfing Internet porn in the classroom. New evidence contradicts information presented by the state's computer expert witness. New London, CT, Superior Court Judge Hillary B. Strackbein said, "The jury may have relied, at least in part, on that false information." She ordered a new trial "in the interest of justice."

The defense claims Amero's computer was inundated with adware-generated pop-up ads, contradicting the state's contention the surfing was deliberate reports Norwich Bulletin.com.

Testifying as a security expert witness at the Air India inquiry, Dr. Kathlenn Sweet, said she had spotted an unlocked gate at a jet fuel depot at Toronto's Pearson International Airport. Dr. Sweet, a former U.S. Air Force attaché in Moscow, was surprised to see the open gate, given the risks of a terrorist attack at an airport. She found the unlocked gate particulary alarming because she spotted it flying into Canada less than a week after U.S. authorities uncovered a plot to blow up jet fuel pipelines and storage facilities at JFK Airport.

As reported in GlobeMail.com, expert witness Dr. Sweet told the inquiry that air safety authorities should not expect to plug their security gaps with expensive new high-tech screening equipment if they are neglecting simple and cheap measures, such as locking fuel depots.