Common Objections to Expert Witnesses in Federal Trials

The Deposition Objections

The initial stages of the case involve a deposition, a report or some form of given the judge and opposing legal counsel a part of the testimony the expert would present to the courtroom. The deposition could later have use in challenging the professional’s words, opinions and testing. Some significant objections arise through the legal analysis of the information provided such as with facts proposed by the expert. The professional is not a lawyer and may not have the knowledge or background in legal matters. Asking his or her opinion about the legal analysis of evidence could lead to a successful objection.

Other objections about the deposition may occur through the details. Privileged information may lead to some objections, but if not raised, they are often waived later. If the expert attempts to detail certain issues

that are out of his or her scope of the subject material, these could cause objections from the opposing legal counsel for relevance. This could include matters that the expert could know but is not within his or her educational background or in his or her field of study. Some objections arise through related and similar matters that are not the same as what the expert was hired for with the specific case.

Answers that Conflict

Some experts are not as aware of the subject matter as others. Additionally, some professionals may change answers to the same questions worded in a different way that could cause a conflict in the information provided to the courtroom. This could lead to an objection and a challenge against the expert witness. Many of these questions occur through the need to clarify details or to expand the subject so the judge, jury or opposing counsel understands the information better. If the answers conflict, the expert may appear unqualified. It is imperative that the professional answers these questions similarly with details that do not conflict.

Leading or Coaching

Some experts require preparation from the lawyer to answer certain questions or in a certain way. However, common objections arise when the opposing lawyer notices that the lawyer is leading the professional under a line of questions or to a certain goal with the testimony. The expert should supply the courtroom with factual information and his or her own opinion on testing and evidence. This is not possible if the lawyer is coaching or leading the expert in his or her testimony. The expert may even ask the lawyer to clarify a question in leading or coaching instances.

Ambiguous or Confusing Answers

While the lawyer is not able to coach or lead the expert, the professional must also provide a solid and straight answer. Improper questions and answers may occur through misleading information, prejudicial context, ambiguous details and statements that are confusing to the judge or jury. If the data given is speculative or not specific enough, the opposing legal team may object to the testimony. Then, what the expert says could become inadmissible based on the type of objection. The professional must remain unbiased and give factual content about the subject matter without appearing to take a specific side other than with the evidence and the results of testing.

Objections before the Trial

When interviewing the expert witness, the opposing legal counsel may bring forth certain objections. These could happen through various failures the lawyer causes such as a failure to designate an expert before the trial occurs. A failure to submit the expert’s report for the case could lead to another objection. The legal team must also provide notes, related materials and details the expert will use to form his or her opinion and results of testing the evidence. Credentials and qualifications are important for the professional to remain a designated expert, and without these, the judge or opposing lawyer may disqualify him or her.

A Lack of Proper Qualifications

When the lawyer does submit all the necessary credentials and qualifications of the expert, it is possible that the professional is not the best fit for the case. In a federal trial, the standards are higher. If the expert is not sufficiently qualified, he or she may work as a consultant to find the best expert.

Provided by HG.org

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with an expert and/or lawyer.