A number of expert witnesses do not market because they believe that attorneys market their qualifications for them to the legal community by word of mouth. With everything an attorney does all day in dealing with the tremendous expectations from clients and the stress of billable hours, do you really want to rely on attorneys to market for you? Do you want your business development to be out of your control and in the hands of lawyers? Do you think attorneys have your curriculum vitae at their fingertips to discuss your qualifications? Do you think attorneys have the time to convey your qualifications? Being a lawyer is daily, fast-paced drudgery in a precarious profession. Lawyers have enough on their plate without having to concern themselves with marketing your services. A wise expert realizes that attorneys only make money when they are working on items they can bill to a client; marketing your services is not a billable event. If you want to maximize your profits as an expert witness, do not rely on attorneys to make your qualifications known by word of mouth.
Judge Grants Continuance in Sex-Crime Case When Experts Not Paid
Montana District Judge Stewart Stadler granted a continuance request to continue a sex crimes’ trial in part because the defense attorney had not yet paid for his expert witnesses.
As reported in the The Daily Interlake, former Children’s House Montessori administrator David Farr is accused of sex crimes against five boys. Farr’s attorney Jack Quatman said he hired Philip Esplin as a child sexual abuse expert witness who is “uniquely qualified to testify in cases in which Wendy Dutton testifies for the prosecution.” Dutton will be a prosecution witness.
The court surprisingly allowed the case to be continued believing that Esplin’s schedule, and the volume of material he must review, meant he could not be prepared without a continuance. Quatman said he could find no other expert witness.
Handwriting Experts Battle Over JonBenet Ramsey Ransom Note
Handwriting experts will square off in Virginia federal court over allegations that one stole the other’s analysis of the JonBenet Ramsey ransom note.
As reported in the Virginia Pilot:
Cina L. Wong, a forensic document examiner with an office on Granby Street, is seeking to stop author and handwriting expert Michelle Dresbold from holding up the ransom note analysis as her own. Wong also wants unspecified monetary damages.
What Will Become of the ALM Expert Witness Directory?
American Lawyer Media (ALM), which runs the ALM Expert Witness Directory, is reportedly for sale. According to the Business Wire:
Wasserstein & Co., LP [ALM’s owner] announced that it has retained Credit Suisse as its exclusive financial advisor to assist it in exploring various strategic alternatives for its investment in ALM, including the possible sale of the company.
It will be interesting to see the price that is paid for ALM if it sold since its primary asset is its magazines and newspapers. Best known for its legal publications, ALM currently owns 34 national magazines, including “The Legal Expert Pages” print directory. ALM also runs an expert witness directory on Law.com. It is unknown what will happen to its online expert witness directory if ALM is sold. The online directory had changed names from “NLJ Experts” to “ALM Experts” in 2005.
Software Experts Likely to Play Major Role in Oracle v. SAP
Oracle said Wednesday that it has sued software expert SAP “about corporate theft on a grand scale” seeking undisclosed damages. Oracle also argues that the theft formed the basis of SAP’s “Safe Passage” program, which is designed to entice Oracle customers to switch to SAP.
As alleged in the complaint:
Oracle brings this lawsuit after discovering that SAP is engaged in systematic, illegal access to – and taking from – Oracle’s computerized customer support systems. Through this scheme, SAP has stolen thousands of proprietary, copyrighted software products and other confidential materials that Oracle developed to service its own support customers.”
Bootprint Expert Testifies in 11 Year Old Murder Case
A Canadian shoe impressions expert witness was allowed to testify in a South Carolina murder trial regarding bootprints made at the scene 11 years ago. Crime scene expert Robert Kennedy said foot impressions made inside the insole of a pair of low-top boots were similar to test impressions made by the defendant Jeffery Jones. This is the second trial for Jones after his original guilty sentence was overturned.
As reported in the South Carolina’s The State:
[Forensic expert] Kennedy, who retired last June after 40 years with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, was a fingerprint expert, tire track expert, and footprint expert before 1989, when he began studying the impressions feet make inside shoes.
Do Expert Witness Standards Affect Payouts?
Payouts for medical malpractice claims remain lower in Oregon than in all but seven other states, despite the loss of a cap on damage awards in 1999. What is interesting is that Oregon also does not have standards for expert witnesses to testify.
As reported in the The Oregonian:
The findings come from one of the first studies that attempts to gauge the effects of various malpractice reforms that states have adopted, mostly to cut costs…Expert witness standards made the most difference in number and size of payouts.Some states require expert witnesses to practice or to have training in the type of medicine under scrutiny in the lawsuit. These laws had about three times to four times the effect of caps on damage awards, researchers concluded.
Expert Witness Marketing Myth #2 – Marketing Hurts My Credibility
Some expert witnesses believe that their professionalism is affected if they make it known that they are available to be retained as an expert witness. For example, many fear embarrassment or a loss of credibility when it is revealed on cross-examination that they market their services.
In reality, the judge and jury just don’t care about your marketing. On cross-examination, attorneys will not risk alienating a jury by delving deeply into your marketing, and judges frown upon such a line of questioning. Good cross-examination is short and hits hard. Attorneys are going to concentrate on two things in their limited amount of time to cross-examine an expert witness: the fact that you are a paid witness, and any inconsistencies in your prior testimony. Even these issues can be quickly defused on direct examination. You, of course, can point out that you are paid for your time, and not for your testimony. Lawyers are simply not going to gain ground with a jury by pointing out that you make your services available to the legal community through marketing.
Utah Expert Allowed to Testify Regarding Woman’s Body
Fourth District Judge Samuel McVey will allow the prosecution to use an endocrinology expert witness to explain the female body in a case involving sexual abuse.
Dr. Larry Andrew is on trial for allegedly inappropriately touching patients during infertility treatments. The defendant has said he massaged the patients genitals to relive pain. The prosecution has argued that the defendant did this soley for sexual gratification.
As reported in the Utah Daily Herald:
Idaho Supreme Court Allows Neurosurgeon to Testify
The Idaho Supreme Court reversed the district court and allowed neurosurgery expert witness Dr. Edward Smith to testify in a case involving a woman who fell into a coma after receiving an infusion of chemicals through a catheter instead of an intravenous line due to a nursing error. Weeks vs. Eastern Idaho Health Services.
The Idaho Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Chief Justice Gerald Schroeder, noted that Dr. Smith was a neurosurgeon of considerable experience. He therefore qualified as an expert witness, the court decided.
As reported in Legal Newsline: