by

Dr. Scott Stanley, director of the Kenneth L. Maddy Equine Analytical Chemistry Laboratory at the University of California-Davis, encouraged officials at the Symposium on Racing and Gaming to gather all available data before prosecuting equine drug cases. Stanley encouraged them to use chemistry expert witnesses to successfully enforce drug policies.

The conference kicked off the Symposium on Racing and Gaming, presented by the University of Arizona’s Race Track Industry Program this week in Tucson, Arizona.outlined various testing procedures. Equine toxicologist and pharmacologist George Maylin D.V.M. showed how blood tests can provide more information than urine tests while lawyer Ira Finkelstein, who handles equine law cases, addressed case preparation and evidence compilation.

For more, see thoroughbredtimes.com.

by

Amednews.com reports on Maryland’s requirements for medical expert witnesses:

Maryland’s highest court upheld a tort reform measure requiring certain qualifications for expert witnesses in medical liability cases, a move physicians say will prevent plaintiffs from using so-called “hired guns” to bolster meritless lawsuits. The high court noted that its interpretation fell in line with other states with similar restrictions on expert witnesses, pointing to decisions in Kansas, North Carolina and Ohio.

Justices reversed a 2008 appeals court ruling allowing a French interventional neuroradiologist, Dr. Gerard Debrun, to testify as a plaintiff expert witness, though he had not practiced or seen patients since retiring in 2001, and most of his income came from serving as an expert witness. Appellate judges found that a majority of Dr. Debrun’s time was spent on other activities that were related to his field, including peer reviewing medical journals, reading, attending conferences and observing procedures.

Continue reading

by

In When the Phone Rings … Twelve Questions for Prospective Expert Witness Assignments, insurance bad faith expert witness Kevin M. Quinley, CPCU, ARM, AIC, writes:

Consultants and expert witnesses are more used to answering questions than asking them. When the phone rings, there may be an attorney or prospective client on the other end of the line. He or she poses questions to the consultant or expert, trying to gauge whether there is a good “fit” between the client’s needs and what the practitioner can offer in the way of experience and expertise.

After answering prospective clients’ questions, effective consultants and expert witnesses may have some queries of their own. In fact, they should. Here are 12 questions that can form the basis of an effective fact-gathering process which unearths aspects of a case to help the consultant and expert witness gauge the degree of fit.

Continue reading

by

Trucking expert witness V. Paul Herbert, C.P.S.A. of Western Motor Carrier Safety Institute, Inc. offers resources on his website including:

The FMCSA Safety and Fitness Electronic Records (SAFER)

System offers company safety data and related services to industry and the public over the Internet. Users can search FMCSA databases, register for a USDOT number, pay fines online, order company safety profiles, challenge FMCSA data using the DataQs system, access the Hazardous Material Route registry, obtain National Crash and Out of Service rates for Hazmat Permit Registration, get printable registration forms and find information about other FMCSA Information Systems.

Continue reading

by

In Citations and Your Credibility, construction site expert witness William Gulya, Jr., President & CEO, Middlesex Trenching Company writes:

If you are stating a fact or opinion, always check and cite your reference and source correctly. The common definition of fact vs. opinion is: Facts are objective, i.e., they can be proven. A fact is something that can be verified and backed up with evidence. Opinions are subjective, i.e., they express a preference or bias. An opinion is based on a belief or view. It is not based on evidence that can be verified. To check if something is a fact, ask yourself, Can this statement be proved? To check if it is an opinion, ask yourself, “Does this tell a thought or feeling?” “Would the statement be true all of the time?” Look for key clue words such as feel, believe, always, never, none, most, least, best, and worst. Cite your source and references in the proper format, e.g., Harvard, MLA or APA. This will ensure your report is clear, concise and credible. There will be no question as to what is provable fact, your opinion or supporting opinions of others.

by

The managed care organization expert witness may write reports on coordinated care, a type of health care delivery that emphasizes active coordination and arrangement of health services. Managed care usually involves three key components: oversight of the medical care given; contractual relationships with and organization of the providers giving care; and the covered benefits tied to managed care regulations.

From http://www.mcol.com.

by

The health maintenance organization expert witness may testify on HMO prepaid health plans.
Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) function much like an insurance company. They offer policies, collect premiums and bear financial risk. So how are HMOs different than regular insurance companies? Insurance companies are a third party to patients and providers. HMOs are also the provider. HMOs usually sub-contract out to provider organizations but also share financial risk with providers. HMOs require care to be delivered only by HMO providers, except in emergencies or under special benefit plans. HMOs, as the full name implies, emphasize preventive medicine.

From http://www.mcareol.com/mcoldict/dictlst.asp.

by

Trucking expert witness V. Paul Herbert, C.P.S.A., of Western Motor Carrier Safety Institute, Inc., offers resources on his website including:

NHTSA is responsible for reducing deaths, injuries and economic losses resulting from motor vehicle crashes. This is accomplished by setting and enforcing safety performance standards for motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment, and through grants to state and local governments to enable them to conduct effective local highway safety programs.

For more, see Paul Herbert.

by

Amednews.com reports on Maryland’s requirements for medical expert witnesses:

Maryland’s highest court upheld a tort reform measure requiring certain qualifications for expert witnesses in medical liability cases, a move physicians say will prevent plaintiffs from using so-called “hired guns” to bolster meritless lawsuits. The 2004 law prohibits the use of medical expert witnesses who devote more than 20% of their professional time to testifying in personal injury cases….
“This allows a qualified doctor to continue to utilize his or her expertise [to assist in medical liability cases], but prevents him or her from launching a second career as purely an expert witness,” states the opinion in University of Maryland Medical System v. Waldt (mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2009/130a08.pdf).

by

In Citations and Your Credibility, construction site expert witness William Gulya, Jr., President & CEO, Middlesex Trenching Company writes:

Whether you have been an expert witness for years or are just starting out, accurate research, proper formatting of citations and clarity will make your written report accurate, impressive and, most of all, credible. As you gain more experience in utilizing proper techniques you will become more comfortable and confident.

One of the most common and repetitive mistakes I see when analyzing my counterparts’ expert reports is in the proper formatting of references and citations. In some instances, they are entirely void of any citations or references. This is a critical error and can result in cross-examination Armageddon for the expert witness. Improper citations or references will frequently result in an unintentional misleading fact or unsubstantiated conclusion. I can assure you, this will be red flagged by opposing counsel and you will be rigorously questioned in cross-examination. The questioning will be harsh and deliberately targeted in an attempt to reduce and bring into doubt your credibility in the eyes of the judge and/or jury. Once doubt is injected into the jury’s mind, your report, testimony and conclusions become questionable at best and at worst unreliable and unbelievable.