Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Databases assist expert witness research

By: dmc-admin//January 25, 2010//

Databases assist expert witness research

By: dmc-admin//January 25, 2010//

Listen to this article

Image

Last year, LexisNexis acquired IDEX, a database of more than 1 million records on more than 200,000 legal experts. And in July, TASA Group, a Pennsylvania-based expert witness consulting and referral firm, introduced its “Challenge History Report,” a service aimed at helping attorneys check past challenges to the admission of expert witness testimony.

Attorneys can use the TASA database to analyze the challenge history of experts referred by TASA, experts they have found on their own or experts for the opposing side.

TASA’s database, which is updated daily, compiles reported and many unreported decisions where a gate-keeping standard has been cited, or the expert’s qualifications have been challenged or strongly criticized by the court.

The report costs $45 and is available within one business day. When challenges appear in the search results, the report provides case summaries with major reasons for admission or exclusion of testimony, and supporting documents, such as briefs, motions to exclude and transcripts.

Suzanne Olita, president and chief executive of TASA, said the service is unique because it focuses heavily on unreported decisions not found in standard case law data.

IDEX’s database includes profiles, testimonial histories, verdict awards, settlement amounts and authored content, as well as expert depositions and court testimony.
Evaluating credibility

Arthur Howe, a partner at Schopf & Weiss, a business litigation boutique firm in Chicago, said he was impressed by the $45 cost of TASA’s new service but would use it as one part of a multi-pronged research effort.

“It’s one tool in the toolbox; it’s not a complete solution,” he said.

Howe said he takes a multi-pronged approach when researching experts. He uses LexisNexis to search IDEX and Daubert databases, court records and newspaper articles. He also checks Westlaw and Google.

In addition, Howe questions opponents’ experts during discovery and asks about every case in which the expert has been retained.

“I’m going to be asking for the name of a case, the court number, the general subject matter, the attorneys on the other side, whether you testified or not, and if not, why not,” he explained. “You can ask that in interrogatories and at the expert’s deposition.”

Ryan S. Stippich, a shareholder in the litigation practice at Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren SC in Milwaukee, and author of the Mortgage Meltdown blog, said thorough research can be used to undermine an opposing expert’s credibility.

For example, he said, “If you can find a situation where the same expert has taken a completely different position or opinion in a different case, then you can … bring out that ‘hired gun’ point that goes to his credibility.”

In other words, he said, the expert is depicted as telling jurors whatever the hiring attorney wants to hear.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests