In view of our recent conversations about the policing and regulating of expert witnesses by various groups and governments, here's a selection of recent news and commentaries:
A recent case in Miami highlights the dangers of exaggerating your credentials. In this case it resulted in criminal charges for the expert. Dr. Bernd Wollschlaeger of the Dale County Medical Association gives some tips for avoiding this situation and the article giving all the details.
The Legal Profession Blog points out what could be a very important case for experts and issues of liability in Suit Against Expert Witness Backfires
David P. Lowe, Milwaukee personal injury lawyer, discusses Intimidation of Expert Witnesses, commenting that, "Added to caps on damage awards, expert witness intimidation is yet another unfair obstacle placed in the path of innocent victims who seek to have their day in court in an effort to obtain compensation."
The Register Herald reports on "Group seeking 'code of ethics' for medical witnesses" with interesting statistics from a University of Virginia study, such as "72 percent [of doctors surveyed] had seen or heard testimony by a medical expert they felt was either in error or based on questionable science."
Robert Ambrogi offers his take on the now infamous Eli Lilly case in which documents were leaked by an expert in An Expert's Escapade.
And finally, I just found this human banter in our very formal Supreme Court of the United States rather unusual and sweet.
No comments:
Post a Comment