Report Writing and Testimony

2020 ◽  
pp. 207-234
Author(s):  
David M. Corey ◽  
Mark Zelig
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Report Writing ◽  
Effective Manner ◽  
Legal Testimony ◽  
Multiple Audiences

In this chapter, the authors offer suggestions on how to write a report that answers the organizational client’s referral questions in a logical and effective manner. The chapter informs readers of the multiple audiences, well beyond the retaining party, that can be expected to scrutinize a written report, and offers guidance on how to write the report in a manner that anticipates the uses those various audiences may eventually make of the report and on how to avoid common errors. In recognition of the fact that the written report establishes the foundation for any future legal testimony, the authors describe the requirements for the admissibility of expert testimony in federal courts and differences between fact and expert witnesses. Finally, the chapter contains guidance on providing written reports and testimony in instances where the psychologist is retained by the examinee or the examinee’s attorney, as well as referrals for tie-breaking opinions.

United States Supreme Court Rules on Expert Testimony

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 934-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary N. McAbee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Us Supreme Court

Many medical and legal commentators have expressed concern about the validity of scientific evidence that is proffered by expert witnesses at depositions and in courts of law.1,2 The sparse research that is available on the testimony of medical expert witnesses suggests that it is frequently flawed and erroneous.3 On June 28, 1993, the United States (US) Supreme Court ruled on the proper standard for admissibility of scientific evidence in the courtroom.4 Although the ruling establishes guidelines that are binding only in federal courts, it is expected that many state courts will follow the Court's ruling. This commentary reviews the Court's guidelines for admissibility of expert testimony, and expresses concern about their applicability in future cases involving scientific testimony.

A Trial Consultant's View of the Medical Expert Witness

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 7-10
Author(s):  
Deborah Rutt ◽  
Kathyrn Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Nonverbal Communication ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Good Teacher ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Medical Terms ◽  
Medical Issues

Abstract Physicians who use the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) often serve as medical expert witnesses. In workers’ compensation cases, the expert may appear in front of a judge or hearing officer; in personal injury and other cases, the physician may testify by deposition or in court before a judge with or without a jury. This article discusses why medical expert witnesses are needed, what they do, and how they can help or hurt a case. Whether it is rendered by a judge or jury, the final opinions rely on laypersons’ understanding of medical issues. Medical expert testimony extracts from the intricacies of the medical literature those facts the trier of fact needs to understand; highlights the medical facts pertinent to decision making; and explains both these in terms that are understandable to a layperson, thereby enabling the judge or jury to render well-informed opinions. For expert witnesses, communication is everything, including nonverbal communication that critically determines if judges and, particularly, jurors believe a witness. To these ends, an expert medical witnesses should know the case; be objective; be a good teacher; state opinions clearly; testify with appropriate professional demeanor; communicate well, both verbally and nonverbally; in verbal communications, explain medical terms and procedures so listeners can understand the case; and avoid medical jargon, finding fault or blaming, becoming argumentative, or appearing arrogant.

scholarly journals Performing Expertise: The Design of Audiovisual Links and the Construction of the Remote Expert Witness in Court

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 698-718
Author(s):  
Emma Rowden ◽  
Anne Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Jury Trials ◽  
Technological Improvements ◽  
The Relationship

This article reports on empirical research conducted into the use of audiovisual links (videolinks) to take expert testimony in jury trials. Studies reveal ambivalent attitudes to court use of videolink, with most previous research focussed on its use for vulnerable witnesses and defendants. Our study finds there are issues unique to expert witnesses appearing by videolink, such as compromised ability to gesture and interact with exhibits and demonstrative tools, and reductions in availability of feedback to gauge juror understanding. Overall, the use of videolinks adds an additional cognitive load to the task of giving expert evidence. While many of these issues might be addressed through environmental or technological improvements, we argue this research has broader ramifications for expert witnesses and the courts. The use of videolinks for taking expert evidence exposes the contingent nature of expertise and the cultural scaffolding inherent in its construction. In reflecting on the implications of these findings, and on the way that reliability, credibility and expertise are defined and established in court, we suggest a more critical engagement with the relationship between content and mode of delivery by stakeholders.

Reports

2019 ◽  
pp. 445-458
Author(s):  
Karen Postal
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Report Writing ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Free Language ◽  
The Way

Many neuropsychologists, attorneys, and judges see report writing as an important foundation for productive expert testimony. This chapter addresses ways in which our reports affect our testimony, and conversely, how experience testifying transforms the way we write our reports. As emphasized throughout this book, we can create access to our expert knowledge by using clear, vivid, jargon-free language on the witness stand when we communicate with attorneys from the first contacts in the case. This chapter extends that recommendation to our reports as well. Using clear, accessible language can make a difference in the impact of our reports in forensic settings.

scholarly journals The Use of Expert Testimony and Results of Search Operations in the Criminal Process in Keeping with Decisions of the European Court of Human Right

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-111
Author(s):  
Irina E. Nikitina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
European Court

The paper examines the problem of using expert testimony and the results of search operations in adversarial courts in keeping with decisions issued by the European Court of Human Rights. It includes a summary of Strasbourg Court rulings concerning search operations and the use of their outcomes. The author lists key requirements imposed by the Strasbourg Court on expert witnesses participating in judicial inquiries.

scholarly journals Invited commentary on Expert testimony in court

2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 187-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek Chiswick
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
England And Wales

Patricia Casey's papers (2003a, b, this issue) cover the situation regarding expert witnesses in England and Wales and in Ireland. The situation in Scotland is outlined below.

Expert Testimony

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 589-589
Author(s):  
WILLIAM M. HENDRICKS
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Medical Liability ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Medical Opinion ◽  
American Academy Of Pediatrics ◽  
Expert Medical Opinion

I would like to commend the Committee on Medical Liability of the American Academy of Pediatrics (Pediatrics. 1989;83:312-313) for the development of sensible guidelines for expert medical testimony. In addition to these recommendations, I would suggest that expert witnesses obtain an affidavit from the plaintiff's attorney stating under oath that they have provided the complete medical records of their client. Furthermore, a copy of any "expert" medical opinion should be forwarded to the defendant physician.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document