6. The Health Care Professional Employed as an Expert

A) Purpose of Expert to Attorney:

1. To serve as a resource consultant to educate the attorney regarding a technical subject,
   *note that documents provided to attorney in response to request for trial/case preparation is work product and NOT discoverable by the opposition
2. To analyze opposition positions
3. To provide discovery assistance: answer interrogatories, pose questions for deposition of opposing expert
4. To provide court testimony and prepare demonstrative evidence for court use
5. To provide report[s] to assist in settlement negotiations.

B) In as much as the expert must have all pertinent data - it should be clarified who is to gather it. If there is more than one expert in related fields who will be testifying on the same side each should be aware of the conclusions of each and the bases for their opinions.

C) If there is more than one expert in related fields who will be testifying on the same side each should be aware of the conclusions of the other[s] and the bases for their opinions.

D) Attributes of a good expert:

1. Be sure qualified in the exact area at issue [current Curriculum Vitae].
2. Communication Skills:
1. Good teacher, articulate
2. Persuasive without appearing overbearing
3. Confident, firm but not argumentative
4. Impartial
5. While conclusions are important, effective explanation of bases of opinions are likely to have greater effect on a jury
6. Comfortable in question and answer format vs. lecturing regarding opinions and bases therefore
7. Explains technical terms in simple words
3. Honesty: Does NOT exaggerate qualifications.
4. Reputation: Good among peers, attorneys.
5. Attitude:
1. Positive attitude
2. Pleasant and likeable
3. Projects competence and objectivity
4. Is neither diffident nor pompous
6. Prior Witness Experience: Able to turn cross examination to his advantage by reiterating and reinforcing direct testimony.
7. Able to Concur with Attorney's Theory of the Case:
1. Review possible other needed experts to present it
2. Determine what other information, material, tests, or literature is needed
3. Review copies of pertinent pleadings and reports
4. Advise attorney if you have a conflict with or are reluctant to take on opposing experts

E) An attorney may have his own expert to provide:

1. Background regarding expert in his/her field
2. Review of the writings of expert in the field
3. Review of writings of other experts in the field
4. Examine transcripts of prior depositions /trials
5. Questions to ask in quest to challenge qualifications for competence or bias and/or to challenge opinion[s] for lack of foundation

F) The cross-examination will probe for the following:

1. Lack of consistency
2. Vulnerability to particular lines of questioning
3. Failure to consider certain facts
4. Lack of experience in the particular area
5. Modification of his/her qualifications to appear knowledgeable or experienced in particular area
6. Has always or mostly testified on one side
7. Has often testified for the same attorney

Author’s Note: The research pertaining to whiplash, TMD and the relationship between them is dynamic and evolving. In litigated cases treating doctors, experts and attorneys should confer on individual case issues. The information in this paper is a guideline only. Individual cases demand specificity, accuracy and communication. Dennis P. Steigerwald, D.C.