In Cross-Examination of Experts On “Underlying Facts or Data,” Carl Robin Teague writes that cases involving complex questions of medical causation often turn on the “battle of the experts.”
Whether the testifying expert witness is a “primary” expert (i.e. published or participated in the study upon which his opinions are rely) or a “secondary” expert (i.e. is relying on a published paper describing a study in which he played no role), requests to produce the raw data underlying published scientific studies typically are countered with several arguments:
1) The published scientific study alone is sufficient, because it has been peer-reviewed.
2) The data contain confidential and sensitive patient information, disclosure of which would infringe on patients’ privacy rights;
More to come from Expert Alert, ABA, Summer 2008