Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from.Pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists acting as experts in medical malpractice actions serve an important role when they provide scientifically sound and unbiased testimony. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. These cases do not contemplate an action in which a party sues an adverse expert witness hired by an opposing party. 2002) (holding that there was no immunity for either pretrial work or trial testimony). Mathews, supra, at 680, n.7 (limiting holding to pretrial litigation support services rather than trial testimony) with Marrogi v. However, a theory of expert witness liability is emerging and several states have ruled that a retained expert witness, the so-called friendly expert witness who testifies voluntarily and who is compensated for his or her services, is no longer shielded from negligence in providing pretrial litigation services or trial testimony. THE EROSION OF THE COMMON LAW DOCTRINE OF WITNESS IMMUNITY * Testimonial experts have traditionally been protected from lawsuits arising out of their work by the doctrine of witness immunity. This article addresses the "break" side of the equation. The amount of time and money expended in this area is substantial and as every litigator knows, an expert can make or break a case.īut what do you do if that expert performs his or her litigation services work negligently and it results in a poor outcome for your client? What liability does the expert face? What, if any, liability does the attorney who selected and retained the expert face? Yes, it is true that an expert can make or break the case. As one court has noted, "ften they play as great a role in the organization and shaping and evaluation of their client's case, as do the lawyers." Murphy v. Often, the expert testimony, especially on damages, is the main event of the case. In just a few decades, expert witnesses in litigation have gone from a rarity to the commonplace, for both trial preparation and for actual trial testimony. And the Martindale-Hubbell directory contains more than 4,000 experts, services, suppliers, and consultants. Large accounting firms and other forensic firms perform litigation support services. But the picture is changing.įROM "AMUSEMENT PARKS" TO "ZOOLOGY," the Technical Advisory Service for Attorneys (TASA) Web site lists more than 9,500 categories of experts. Expert witnesses have historically enjoyed broad-ranging immunities.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |