by

In Using Vocational Rehab Experts and Life-Care Planners to Prove General Damages, author Geoffrey S. Wells discusses the use of vocational rehabilitation and life-care planning experts. He begins by telling us that the use of a vocational rehabilitation expert and a life care planning expert witness is even more important today than it has been in the past.

This is due in part to the jury’s overall skepticisim on general damage awards. It is not uncommon today to hear a juror during jury selection say something to the effect that “I have no problem awarding damages that are actually provable, such as lost wages or medical costs in the past and the future, but I have a real problem with pain and suffering damages.” The plainfiff lawyer’s ability therefore to provide actual economic numbers for the jurors is more important today than it has ever been in the past.

More to follow from The Advocate, November 2007.

by

Transplant surgeon Dr. Hootan Roozrokh of San Francisco is charged with three felonies alleging he attempted to hasten the death of a potential organ donor, 25-year-old Ruben Navarro. In the San Luis Obispo trial, County prosecutor Karen Gray has yet to reveal the names of transplants – organ/donor expert witnesses she plans to call who are coming from out of town. Roozrokh’s attorney, M. Gerald Schwartzbach, threatened to ask for delays throughout the preliminary hearing because he says that without an expert witness list, he hasn’t been able to prepare the defense’s case. A delay would cause scheduling problems for Gray and Superior Court Judge Martin Tangeman, who both have other criminal and civil court proceedings on the calendar. San Luis Obispo.com also writes:

A visibly frustrated Tangeman said no one should assume anything about how the preliminary hearing will proceed. He told Gray that not knowing the witnesses’ names and tentative timeline for the prosecution case has become “horribly problematic.”

by

Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson told a federal judge in Tulsa that the poultry industry has “infested” waterways in northeastern Oklahoma with pollution that is a risk to the public’s health. The state is seeking an injunction from Federal Judge Gregory K. Frizzell barring the spread of poultry litter in the million-acres Illinois River watershed that stretches from northwest Arkansas through northeast Oklahoma.

According to NewOK.com, opening statements in the hearing were delayed as attorneys wrangled over three motions that involved the expected testimony of pollution expert witnesses and the state’s request to eliminate some data prepared by one of its witnesses. Edmondson outlined the state’s case and the list of expert witnesses it expects to call over the three days that Judge Frizzell has given it to make its case. Next will come the poultry industry defense.

by

In Jury Psychology Can Undermine Plaintiffs’ Expert Witnesses authors Neil Goldberg, John Freedenberg, Joseph Mooney, and Joseph Hanna write that cross examination of plaintiff’s expert witness should be geared to thwart the emotional hijacking of jurors that plaintiffs endeavor to secure. This strategy includes hiring a jury consultant expert witness. They explain:

Most trial attorneys are familiar with the Chicago study that found that 85 percent of jurors vote after deliberation in a manner consistent with the impressions they developed after the opening statements. A study conducted by Angela Abel of Decision Quest distributed at DRI’s 2006 Preeminent Trial Lawyer Seminar found that the ultimate evaluation a juror reaches in a case on both liability and damages essentially remained unchanged by the voir dire process. One interpretation of these two poignant nuggets of information is that at the moment of accountability, when many jurors engage in the deliberation process, the critical factor that most significantly influences how they analyze the case is their longstanding predispositions.

Determining what those longstanding predispositions are and what themes will influence jurors the most are reasons defendants in catastrophic injury cases more and more find that there is great value in engaging in “mock jury” exercises.

Continue reading

by

In How to Use Experts to Prove the Plaintiff’s Case, Thomas M. Demsey advises attorneys on how to find the right fit with an expert witness. In complex factual situations such as products liability cases Demsey states that “Too often the initial consideration is not well thought-out.” Demsey gives tips on lines of communication with your products liability expert witness.

….experts often become, or give the appearance of, advocates for your position. This will also detract from the wtiness’s impartial credibililty and is easily picked up by a jury. Your expert should be willing to concede to points that are well taken during cross-examination because this adds to his or her credibility. During the rehearsal of testimony, however, you must emphasize that the main thrust of yor expert’s opinion must be consistency, and he or she must have the courage to stand by their opinions no matter the vigor of the cross-examination or the onslaught of deeming questions. This is the true test of the ability of an expert to testify and clearly separates the “wannabes” from the “real deal.”

From How to Use Experts to Prove the Plaintiff’s Case, Thomas M. Dempsey, The Advocate Magazine, January 2008.

by

Mark Jensen, 48, of Pleasant Prairie, WI, is accused of poisoning and suffocating his wife Julie Jensen, 40. Dr. Barry Rumack, a medical toxicologist and former director of the Rocky Mountain Poison and Drug Center in Denver, testified as a poison expert witness that he read many of the prosecution experts’ reports and believes Julie Jensen committed suicide. Pathology expert witness John Scott Denton backed up Rumack’s testimony. Denton has handled dozens of ethylene glycol deaths.

The prosecution called computer expert witness Martin Koch. Koch showed the Internet history on the Jensen’s computer, which included a number pornagraphic Web sites which had been deleted by the user days before Julie Jensen died.

by

Chico State students Chris Bizot and Mike Murphy and Butte College student Matthew Krupp face charges for hazing pledges in 2007. All three belonged to Beta Theta Pi, a fraternity that lost university and international recognition after the police were contacted about hazing activities. Bizot’s lawyer, Bill Mayo has requested the names of medical expert witnesses used in the prosecution’s argument saying he wants time to bring in his own expert witnesses to argue for the defense. OrionOnline.com also reports:

Krupp, Murphy and Bizot allegedly forced pledges to submerge themselves to their necks in a bathtub filled with ice water, locked them in a stairwell closet, threw beer and “other disgusting things” at them and forced them to run through mud and do calisthenics, District Attorney Mike Ramsey said….Although these activities may be humiliating, there was no risk of serious bodily injury and they can’t be considered hazing under the current definition, Mayo said…”It’s a new case, it’s a new law and these guys are really trying to stretch it and make the shoe fit,” Mayo said.

by

Vermont prosecutors say they need more time to find an expert witness to testify against a Colchester orthopedic surgeon charged with performing improper examinations on nine young female patients. According to WPTZ.com:

Joseph Abate, head of sports medicine at Fletcher Allen Health Care’s orthopedic and rehabilitation department, is facing 14 felony charges from aggravated sexual assault to lewd and lascivious conduct. Assistant Attorney General Cindy Maguire said the surgery expert witness the state had lined up to question Abate’s examinations now could not testify. Abate’s lawyer, Eric Miller, who has called the charges a “tragic mistake,” said the state’s case is falling apart.

Despite his objections, the judge on Monday gave state prosecutors 60 days to find replacement expert witnesses.

by

Alcohol, Drug & DUI Testing expert witnesses can save clients in a DWI case and they would not have easy access to these expert witnesses without the criminal defense attorney. If the client chooses a public defender, they will not get the best possible defense. American Chronicle.com writes on the advantages of hiring an experienced criminal lawyer.

Public defenders, no matter how experienced they are, are only Jack of all trades. It means they handle all sorts of cases and not specific ones that need to specialized skills. They do not have specialization in handling DWI cases… You would want the best possible defense for your case, and this is possible only if you hire a specialized DWI legal professional…When you hire a DWI legal representative, you get an opportunity to take advantage of their specialized knowledge of the various aspects associated with DWI cases. They know the in and out of the DWI laws and they can easily use the same to handle your specific case in the most efficient

by

Maryland’s highest court is deciding whether a consumer suing a car company under the federal lemon law needs an expert witness to testify about a defect in the car. Mary Crickenberger, represented by Kimmel & Silverman, says she had numerous electrical problems with her Hyundai in the three years after she bought it, with the car sputtering to a stop one day. Hyundai filed a motion to exclude Kimmel & Silverman’s automotive expert witness. Kimmel & Silverman withdrew the expert but did not substitute another. The Maryland Daily Record also reports:

The defendant, Hyundai Motor America, wants the court to hold that not only did Kimmel & Silverman need an expert in plaintiff Mary S. Crickenberger’s case, but that the firm must show a defect in Crickenberger’s case and all of the firm’s other cases…

A group called the Product Liability Advisory Council Inc., which represents manufacturers, filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, arguing that permitting Kimmel & Silverman to pursue lemon-law cases without requiring expert testimony will drastically alter the landscape of product-liability law.