Expert opinions play an essential role in legal cases. The goal of expert testimony is to help a trier of fact understand complex matters and make sound decisions based on reliable facts, data, and information. Experts should expect to be closely questioned on their opinions, how they were formed, and the research, investigation, and background work they used to come up with their conclusions.
The law requires expert witnesses to develop their opinions based on provable facts, test results from established methods recognized in their field of expertise, and information researched from credible sources. In addition, experts must be able to articulate their findings in a clear, concise manner that will be easily understood by a jury.
As a result, expert testimony may not be admitted unless it meets certain requirements and follows specific rules to help ensure that it is relevant and reliable. The Daubert rule serves as the “gatekeeper” to exclude expert witness testimony that is:
To ensure your expert’s opinion will be admissible, it is important that you choose an experienced professional with a strong track record of courtroom credibility and academic rigor. Your expert should be able to defend their methodologies and conclusions under cross-examination. For example, you can challenge an opposing expert’s conclusions by pointing out that their research experience involves only studying patients without the disease in question, while your doctor has extensive hands-on experience treating those same patients. You can also delve into the details of their work by reviewing technical articles and reports in the field. Likewise, current news stories about the success or failure of a particular medical device can provide additional contemporary support material.