Remove Education Remove Expert Testimony Remove Witnesses
article thumbnail

DEPOSITION OUTLINE OF A MEDICAL MALPRACTRICE DEFENSE EXPERT

Plaintiff Trial Lawyer Tips

QUALIFICATIONS 1. SEE WITNESSES biography (a) BIRTH DATE (b) MARITAL STATUS 2 GENERAL EDUCATION OUTLINE: SCHOOLS APPLIED FOR & REJECTED? ADDITIONAL, TRAINING, SEMINARS & EDUCATION 5. PATIENT REFERRAL 4. KNOWLEDGE OR RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER DEFENSE EXPERTS 5. 3. DEGREES 4.

article thumbnail

From Evidence to Misinformation: Courts Brace for Deepfake Challenges

Complex Discovery

Key recommendations include: Pretrial Evidentiary Hearings: Judges should require early disclosure of potential deepfake-related evidence, enabling discovery and the use of expert witnesses to authenticate digital materials. Given the rapid pace of AI innovation, staying ahead of adversaries will be critical.

Evidence 111
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

The Power of Media Coverage: How it Shapes Jurors’ Perceptions and How Scientific Jury Analysis Can Help Mitigate Bias

Jury Analyst

Addressing Media Bias: Strategies for Lawyers and Litigators: · Education and Awareness: Lawyers should educate jurors about the potential biases that can arise from media exposure. Expert Testimony: Lawyers can call upon expert witnesses to explain the impact of media on perceptions and provide alternative interpretations of evidence.

article thumbnail

What’s New in eDiscovery Pricing? Summer 2024 Market Report

Complex Discovery

Investigative Services and Expert Testimony : For investigation, analysis, and report generation, 45.9% Expert witness testimony commands higher rates, with 49.2% In terms of investigative services and expert testimony, the market has seen a slight shift towards lower and alternative pricing models.

article thumbnail

Federal Rule of Evidence 702: A Useful Rule (When It's Followed)

Evidence at Trial

In support of its motion, Merrell included a declaration from an expert who opined that, based on all relevant literature, no study found that Bendectin was capable of causing malformations in fetuses. The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment, citing the "general acceptance" standard found in Frye v.