Attacking the expert for bias
I feel that the collateral information about an expert which indicates bias is more important in cross examination then the issue involved. If you can show a lack of credibility then the opinions of the expert have little weight with the jury. Here’s a simple check list of reminders to ask at the time of the deposition for you to consider
ADVERTISING FOR WORK
- How became involved in this case
- Does advertising for work
- Belongs to expert witness group
- Any past connection defense firm
- Any past connection defendants
EXPERIENCE AS EXPERT
- How long acted as expert
- Experience – frequency:
a. cases reviewed
b. reports written
c. depositions given
d. times testified
- what states testified in
- What percentages for plaintiff vs defendant
FEES CHARGED
- For review
- For deposition
- For testimony
INCOME FROM EXPERT WORK
TORT REFORM ACTIVITY
- What political activity
- Letters or emails to paper, media or legislators
- Contributions made
- Literature in his office about it
WITNESS CONSULTANT
- Any consultations with non lawyer re being witness
- Videos watched or information given
KNOWLEDGE ABOUT LOCAL MEDICAL STANDARDS
DEFINITIONS USED IN ARRIVING AT OPINIONS
What is your definition of these terms as it applies to your opinions here:
- Medical negligence
- Malpractice
- Medical standard of care
- Reasonable medical certainty