Episode Details

From forensics to financials and the medical to the technical, trial lawyers rely on expert witnesses to help fact finders understand complicated concepts and issues in their case. But dealing with experts is an expert technique in itself, so in this episode NITA Program Director Gene Tanaka breaks down the battle-tested process that has brought him success. First, he lays out the standards for expert testimony and traps to avoid, then shares steps for direct examinations, issues in cross, and persuasive techniques. 

Topics
04:20  Why experts are important
05:54  Breadth of expert opinions
07:24  Expert traps
11:44  Standards for expert testimony  
15:28  Five steps for direct examination: Introduction and teaser
17:48  Qualifications
20:10  Red flags in an expert’s background
21:28  Opinion
25:24  Basis for opinion
27:39  Difference of experts’ opinions
28:50  Conclusion
30:19  Persuasive techniques
34:10  Conducting cross
42:06  Signoff questions

Quote
“One of the things that we [attorneys] often do is we rely too much on credentials. We look at an expert and we think, ‘Well, this person has this certification and this level of education, and therefore they must be better than the other person who doesn’t have that.’ But you know, a lot that is just lost on everybody – the trier of fact. They can’t tell the difference between one credential or the other. But what they can tell the difference is whether someone is likeable and whether they’re understandable.” Gene Tanaka

Resources
Gene Tanaka (LinkedIn)
Expert Testimony slides (PPT)
Modern Trial Advocacy: Analysis and Practice (book)
Federal Rules of Evidence with Objections: As Amended to December 1, 2023 (book)
Expert Testimony: A Guide for Expert Witnesses and the Lawyers Who Examine Them (book)
Effective Expert Testimony (book)