by

In Reasonable Scientific Certainty, document examination expert witness Dennis Ryan writes:

A recent report by the Criminal Justice Section of the American Bar Association (ABA) to their House of Delegates addresses the common term “Reasonable Scientific Certainty.” This term or a variant of the term has been seen frequently in many expert reports and has been called a requirement by many who use our expert reports. The ABA report recommends that this phrase be avoided because it has no scientific meaning.

The ABA report calls this term ambiguous and it appears to be used to measure the degree of confidence of the expert in his or her conclusions. This ambiguity can cause the expert’s conclusions to be misinterpreted by anyone that reads the expert report.

Continue reading

by

US District Court, E.D. Wash. Judge Frederick L. Van Sickle has granted a request for a former Spokane Police Officer to interview a government expert witness. Karl F. Thompson Jr. was convicted of using excessive force and lying to cover up his actions in the death of Otto Zehm. Video forensics expert witness Grant Fredericks claims prosecutors left out information that would have helped Thompson.

by

On his website, patents expert witness Manfred E. Wolff writes:

Crucial goals in patent preparation to minimize such pitfalls–both “design around” attacks and invalidation attacks–include strict attention to the question “what is the correct identification of the invention”; full disclosure of the invention; fully enabling the invention; correct listing of inventorship; clear understanding of the prior art; and the preparation of broad, carefully crafted claims that are fully supported by the disclosure.

The utilization of patent professionals who have broad managerial experience in industrial pharmaceutical R&D–particularly when the inventors are relatively inexperienced regarding some of these pitfalls–markedly facilitates the attainment of these goals and is a highly effective means to produce bullet-proof patents. Intellepharm patent professionals have the experience and insight into these issues to make this possible.

Continue reading

by

In The Use of an Insurance Expert, insurance claims expert witness Barry Zalma writes:

In California, and other states, an expert must have some first hand experience in insurance and insurance claims handling to qualify to present testimony. Once qualified it is essential that the expert is able to credibly explain to a trier of fact, in easy to understand language, to the party seeking to prove bad faith or a defense to bad faith. A qualified insurance claims handling expert can explain why or why not the insurer reasonably, prudently and in good faith should reject or accept an insured’s claim. The testimony of the expert can defuse, if not eliminate, the plaintiff insured’s allegations of bad faith. A qualified expert can show that an insurer failed to fulfill the custom and practice of insurers in the jurisdiction.

by

Allegan County, MI, sheriff’s Sgt. Chris Kuhn is an accident reconstruction expert. With traffic accidents increasing due to distracted drivers, Kuhn said a June 28, 2010, crash in Allegan County could have been fatal. The expert said the only reason no one died was because it was a head on collision and that cars are built to sustain those type of accidents rather well.

by

On his website, patents expert witness Manfred E. Wolff writes:

In today’s competitive environment, existing pharmaceutical patents are at risk from a number of pitfalls.

In particular, “Designing Around” (i.e., developing a chemical entity, device, or method that avoids the claims of an existing patent) is a legal means for producing new products to compete with existing patented products.

Continue reading

by

In How to Avoid Charges of Bad Faith, insurance expert witness Barry Zalma writes:

Almost every lawsuit filed against an insurance company, especially when a claim is denied, alleges that the insurer acted in bad faith. In the first party context, bad faith claims typically allege that the insurer did not have a reasonable basis to deny coverage, and that the insurer engaged in unfair or deceptive conduct in the process of handling the claim and reaching its conclusions regarding coverage. In the third party context, there is typically an allegation that the insurer failed to timely settle a claim in which liability had become reasonably clear. Insurers, with unfounded courage, deny claims based on the recommendations of a claims handler whose experience may be, and usually is, limited.

by

Trucking expert witnesses may testify on trucking safety, commercial motor vehicles, truck maintenance, and related matters. In the news this week, Bendix Commercial Vehicle Systems has notified customers and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that its ATR-6 valves installed on as many as 60,000 vehicles may be faulty and cause breaking problems. Many of the vehicles manufactured between Dec. 2, 2010 and Jan. 18, 2012 will be retrofitted and delivery of new vehicles has been postponed.

Read more: http://www.bendix.com/en/.