Avoiding Allegations of Deliberate Indifference (Part 1)

Deliberate indifference can be defined as a “conscious or reckless disregard of the consequences of one’s acts or omissions,” or simply put, “What did you know, when did you know it, and what did you do about it?” Without question,… Continue Reading

Four-Factor Test to Determine Expert Testimony Reliability

The Daubert standard main purpose is to determine the scientific validity of the offered expert testimony, giving defense attorneys more ways in which to attack such testimony.  Thus, judges as “gatekeepers” must use four factors to determine whether the theories… Continue Reading

Adversarial Bias: Expert Testimony in Modern Litigation

Some Daubert opponents often argue that any reliability test is improper for expert testimony, and eyewitnesses’ testimony is not subject to any special reliability test. In this regard, the modern rules for expert testimony assert that such testimony is susceptible… Continue Reading

The Acceptable “Rate of Error” in Expert Witnesses’ Opinion

The “error rate”, one of the Daubert factors, requires the trial judge to evaluate the error rate with regard to whether the method has been tested, and whether the expert’s opinion has an acceptable rate of error. If the test… Continue Reading

Role of Expert – Duty of Care Professionals- Expert Witness

Professionals who undertake the role of expert witnesses in litigation need to be impartial and owe a primary duty of care to the court and subsequently to their clients. This duty of care can definitely be breached. The judicial process… Continue Reading

Applicability of Immunity for “Friendly Experts” Witness Testimony

The so-called “friendly experts” hired specially to provide opinion testimony in litigation are not entitled to immunity for their work in preparing and communicating their opinions. Some jurisdictions have analyzed whether the policy arguments used to justify the witness immunity… Continue Reading