Expert Witness Blog

In Undue Influence in Making Bequests: A Forensic Psychiatrist Examines the Evidence, undue influence expert witness Stephen M. Raffle, M.D., writes:

One of the inferences for the exertion of “undue” influence is if a close or isolative relationship existed between the testator and the proponent of the changed will or trust at the time changes are entered into. When the beneficiary/caregiver isolates the testator from his/her other natural heirs, there is an index of suspicion to the psychiatrist for undue influence.

Another circumstantial fact may be a financial relationship between the “favored” beneficiary and the testator. For example, the favored beneficiary has check-writing authority and is otherwise being empowered to take over the financial affairs of the testator. Yet other example may be the receipt of a joint tenancy interest in real property even though the property was paid for entirely by the testator, or being employed by the testator’s business (or promoted if already an employee) up to and including being made an officer of the company.

In Cyberbullying, Trolling, and Cyberstalking: the Dark Side of Free Speech (part 1a), computer security expert witness Steve Burgess answers the question What is Free Speech?

To listen to, read, or watch the news, it is clear that there is broad misunderstanding about the right to free speech. It is not the freedom to say anything to anyone anywhere, but rather a prohibition to keep the government from denying us the right to express ourselves. The Bill of Rights asserts that we have certain freedoms simply by dint of being born human beings.

We treasure our freedoms and freedom of expression or speech is one of the most sacred. Having this right allows us to speak truth to power and to satirize fools. In fact, one of the earliest forms of protected speech may have been the Celtic bards who worked for tribal kings, satirizing poor (or opposing) rulers, but immune from retribution under Brehon law many hundreds of years ago, or even thousands of years under European Celtic tradition.

Immigration expert witnesses may consult on issues involving employment based immigration, green cards, immigration policy, and asylum.The Society for Applied Anthropology (SfAA) presented Anthropologists as Expert Witnesses: Theory, Practice and Ethics at their annual meeting March 24-28. University of Cincinnati assistant professor of anthropology Leila Rodriguez has testified in immigration cases and writes:

I think the legal system’s understanding of culture is very different from how anthropologists define culture,” explains Rodriguez. The legal system often is looking for something with clear limits around it – the black-and-white answer – when most of our answers as anthropologists are gray.

Recorded sessions will be published at a rate of a couple a week, starting about two weeks after the annual meeting. Sign up to be notified via RSS or email.

In Testamentary Capacity to Execute a Will and Mental Competency to Execute a Trust or Contract, forensic psychiatry expert witness Stephen M. Raffle, M.D., writes:

A Will is not a contract because it does not represent a promise to perform a service or execute an action for another person (including corporations). It is solely an allocation of a person’s wealth on death. A contract, such as a Trust, implies the potential for an adversarial relationship if one of the parties does not perform as promised. In a Trust the parties may be the Trustors and the Trustees. Therefore, an adversarial relationship potentially exists between the parties. Because of this potential adversarial relationship, each of the parties must be able to understand the consequences of their actions vis-à-vis being in default. This requires each party to be able to understand with meaning (mental competency) the terms and conditions of the contract which may themselves be complex and require multiple steps. For this reason the mental state required to enter into a contract requires an understanding of consequences and an ability to understand complex meanings contained within the contracted obligation, neither of which is explicit or implied in the execution of a Will.

Mental competence to enter into a contract has a higher threshold than mental competence to execute a Will. It is therefore possible for a person to retain testamentary capacity but not be competent to execute a Trust.

In Undue Influence in Making Bequests: A Forensic Psychiatrist Examines the Evidence, undue influence expert witness Stephen M. Raffle, M.D., writes:

Undue influence when creating a will, codicil to amend a will, trust or other legal instrument, occurs when the conduct of another prevents a testator (or anyone for that matter) from exercising his or her free will. The occurrence of undue influence is established by demonstrating that the testator’s testamentary disposition was caused by undue pressure, argument, or other coercive acts which destroyed the testator’s freedom of choice in the disposition of the assets of his or her estate, and is replaced by the substituted judgment/wishes of another. Litigants may characterize the circumstances as perceived or misperceived exploitation of a vulnerable individual, especially as we see a generation of baby boomers reach ages at risk for dementia and Alzheimer’s, both medical conditions best assessed by a medical doctor. Undue influence may be proven with circumstantial evidence, i.e., without direct evidence. It is necessary to demonstrate by fact that undue influence has occurred. Often the term “undue influence” in a testamentary setting is lumped with the phrases “testamentary capacity” and “competency” to make a Will or Trust. A dispute about testamentary capacity may arise in the same case as undue influence, but from the forensic psychiatrist’s point of view, the issues are different. The making of Wills vs. Trusts have different thresholds of competency and the distinction is important to understand when evaluating if susceptibility to undue influence is considered.

There are various indicia of undue influence. Those indicia include, but are not limited to, the following:

In Choosing an Orthopedic Surgery Expert Witness, Burton Bentley II, M.D FAAEM, writes:

Orthopedic surgery (commonly spelled “Orthopaedic” in academia) is a field of surgery dealing with the surgical treatment of disease and injury of the musculoskeletal system. Orthopedic surgeons are licensed physicians who complete a five year residency program in orthopedic surgery often followed by subspecialization in a specific branch of orthopedic surgery. Common subspecialty areas include Hand Surgery, Total Joint Reconstruction (i.e. arthroplasty), Pediatric Orthopedics, Foot and Ankle Surgery, Spine Surgery, Sports Medicine, and Trauma. Board certification in Orthopedic Surgery is conferred by the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, a section of the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). Physicians who enter the field of orthopedics via an osteopathic pathway (D.O. rather than M.D.) are eligible for Board Certification under the American Osteopathic Board of Orthopedic Surgery.

Orthopedic surgeons diagnose, image, medically treat, and surgically correct a broad range of musculoskeletal conditions. Common procedures in orthopedic surgery include arthroscopic surgery upon the knee and shoulder, joint replacement surgery (predominantly upon the hip and knee), spine surgery, and carpal tunnel release. The foundation of orthopedics, however, is the stabilization and treatment of various fractures. Fractures may be treated non-operatively (closed reduction) or operatively (open reduction). Some fractures may require internal hardware (internal fixation) while others require external hardware (external fixation) or no hardware at all. The most common fracture sites include the hip (e.g. femoral neck), ankle, tibia, wrist (radius and/or ulna), humerus, and clavicle. Other acute conditions in orthopedic surgery include compartment syndrome and the management of complex bone and joint infections. Depending on the complexity of the procedure, orthopedic interventions may be performed in the office, in an outpatient surgical facility (ambulatory surgery center), or in a hospital-based operating room.

Explosions expert witnesses may consult on flammable materials, fire & explosion analysis, and natural gas explosions, as well as related matters. Investigators have reported that the cause of an explosion last week in Stafford Township, NJ, was a crack in a gas line. Firefighters, paramedics, and New Jersey Gas employees were injured. The shock wave from the explosion flattened one home and damaged a score more.

Commonly used for heating, natural gas, methane, propane and butane make up the majority of residential gas explosions. After a 127 year old gas main exploded in East Harlem, NY, in 2014, Natural Gas Watch.org wrote that natural gas explosions seem to be occurring with disturbing regularity in the US.

There are more than 5,000 miles of natural gas pipeline beneath the streets, homes and buildings of New York City and according to public records, a significant portion of that underground pipeline is made of aging cast iron that’s prone to leak. Indeed, hundreds of miles of this pipeline are at least 100 years old and some of it even dates back to 1889.

Natural Gas Watch.org reported in 2014:

In A Review of BMC Software, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue: Should Intercompany Accounts Receivable Be Considered “Debt”? Samuel S. Nicholls of Willamette Management Associates writes:

In the matter of BMC Software, Inc. (“BMC”) v. Commissioner, the U.S. Tax Court (the “Tax Court”) ruled on the definition of “debt” as it relates to intercompany indebtedness between a U.S. tax¬payer and its foreign subsidiary.

At issue in this decision was the BMC accounts receivable owed from its foreign subsidiary, BMC Software European Holding (BSEH). This accounts receivable was created as a result of a transfer pricing settlement between BMC and the Internal Revenue Service (the “Service”) in 2007.