An expert opinion is a specialized conclusion or inference made by someone qualified in a particular field. These conclusions are meant to assist the fact-finder in understanding complex issues in a case. Generally, they must be grounded in reliable methods and data commonly relied upon by professionals in the same field. Expert opinions can be a very powerful tool in the legal system, but can also be misleading or even wrong. This article will explore how to best present and challenge an expert’s opinion.
While it is not the purpose of this article to discuss how expert testimony is analyzed under Daubert, there are a number of considerations to keep in mind when preparing an expert for trial. Among the most important of these is how the expert reaches his or her opinion.
The expert should be expected to list on cross-examination the facts and data he or she relied on to form the opinion. In addition, experts should be prepared to explain how the information received relates to the subject matter of the case and whether it is reliable in its application to the specific fact pattern involved.
Finally, an expert should be able to provide evidence that his or her research into the subject matter of the case was conducted independently and not expressly for the purposes of producing an Opinion. This will help to show the jurors that the expert is using the same level of intellectual rigor in his or her research for the case as he or she uses in his or her regular professional work outside of paid consulting.