AuthorWilliam M. Audet/Kimberly A. Fanady
Task 70 Determine Whether to Retain Experts
Task 71 Find and Retain Experts
Task 72 Maximize Use of Experts
Task 73 Make Expert Disclosures
Task 74 Propound Expert Discovery
Task 75 Respond to Expert Discovery
Task 76 Notice Expert Depositions
Task 77 Prepare Experts for Depositions
Task 78 Depose Experts
Task 79 Supplement Expert Discovery
Form 24 Expert Witness Disclosure
(This page intentionally left blank.)
Determine Whether to Retain Experts
A. An expert is someone with knowledge, skill, experience, training or education in a particular area. See FRE
702; United States v. Goxcon-Chagal, 885 F. Supp. 2d 1118, 1133 (D.N.M. 2012) (“Rule 702 uses a liberal
B. Experts may act in various capacities, including:
 -
cialized knowledge.
2. Consulting with counsel to help develop a case theme, understand technical issues and propound and
respond to discovery.
A. Evaluate whether you need an expert at the outset of a case or as soon as possible to maximize the expert’s
assistance. Experts can be extremely useful in acquainting counsel with technical terms and concepts, helping
prepare pleadings, shaping litigation strategy and assisting in discovery.
B. Reevaluate your need for experts as the case progresses and new issues arise or your case theory changes.
C. Disclose information about experts who will testify at trial 90 days before tri al. FRCP 26(a)(2)(D)(i). See Task
73; and if intended as a rebuttal to another expert, within 30 days after the other party’s disclosure. FRCP
26(a)(2)(D)(ii). If you fail to disclose your experts as required, the court may not allow them to testify. Novak
v. Bd. of Trs., 777 F.3d 966, 972 (7th Cir. 2015) (“Failure to comply with the disclosure requirements of Rule
A. Review the rules pertaining to experts.
1. FRCP 26(a)(2) addresses pretrial disclosure of experts and permissible expert discovery.
 
 
trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine an issue. LifeWise Master Funding v. Telebank,
   
 
3. FRE 704 provides that otherwise admissible expert testimony may not be excluded merely because it
  
defendant doctor was negligent. The court may not exclude the testimony on the ground that the expert
is usurping the trier of fact’s role by testifying on an ultimate issue.
B. Determine the type of experts you need.
1. Review your annotated proof of fact (see Task 4) to identify issues for which an expert’s assistance would
be helpful. For example:
a. A tort claim may require an accident reconstruction expert, a doctor, a rehabilitation expert or an economist.
b. A contract claim may require an expert in the subject matter of the contract, a business broker or an accountant.
c. In professional negligence/malpractice cases, expert testimony is often required by law.
2. Consider using experts in:
a. Cases which present complex, technical issues, such as products liability, securities fraud and toxic contamination.
  
not completely arcane. For example, an expert can help explain damage calculations even though
most jurors understand medical bills and lost wages.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT