February 2008 Archives

Round Table Group, Inc., the premier expert witness referral firm, received a remarkable opportunity as an exhibitor at IQPC's Trademark & Copyright Protection Conference in New York City on January 23 - 25, 2008.

The conference attendees and speakers were senior trademark and copyright attorneys from some of the biggest law firms and companies in the world. "As the premium service in the expert witness referral industry, having the opportunity to discuss Round Table Group with some of the top attorneys currently practicing in the intellectual property field made this a very unique opportunity for us. It is not every day that we get to meet the attorneys of Google, Yahoo, NBC, Gucci, Disney and Dell in the same place." said Mark Swansiger, VP of Marketing at Round Table Group. "We were able to network with these attorneys and engage them one-on-one about the expert witness services Round Table Group offers."

Swansiger noted that Round Table Group has a long history of working with prestigious national and international industry leaders, and this conference was no exception. "We had dozens of meetings with top General Counsels during this conference, sharing ways we could assist them with all their expert witness needs. All of this face-time in one place was a terrific experience."

There have been numerous stories in the news concerning the RIAA's legal action against alleged music"copyright infringement" through file-sharing. The RIAA contends that the transfer of music files using peer-to-peer software has greatly eroded the profits of the music industry and harmed honest consumers and retailers. Accordingly, it has brought lawsuits against thousands of people in the United States and has employed a "super expert" to demonstrate how particular computers have illegally uploaded copyrighted works.

An internationally renowned Dutch expert has just issued a report deeming the efforts of the RIAA's expert witness as "borderline incompetent." He argues that the procedures used by the witness lacked "in-depth analysis" and "proper scientific scrutiny." The Dutch expert was the individual who helped quash the legal efforts of the Dutch counterpart of the RIAA in 2005.

The full story can be found here.

In a continuation of the fallout from the Canadian inquiry into the disgraced "forensic pathologist" and expert witness who actually had no forensic training, a respected former judge has come forward, claiming that Canadian judges have done a "poor" job of limiting the testimony of expert witnesses to areas within their actual field of expertise. The judge noted that in his 29 years on the bench, he only rejected a "half-dozen experts."

The full story can be found here.

Earlier in the week I mentioned how it is getting harder in smaller communities to locate expert medical witnesses. I came across this news story over at expertwitnessblog.com. Apparently prosecutors in Vermont are having trouble finding a medical expert witness to testify against an orthopedic surgeon who is accused of conducting improper medical examinations on nine young women. The judge has given the prosecution an additional 60 days. Might be a good time to contact an expert witness referral firm.

Thanks to Jim over at expertwitnessblog.com for pointing this out.

Professor Joseph Sanders of the University of Houston Law Center has written an excellent article discussing expert witness ethics. The article details the ethical standards that should attach to expert witnesses and methods those in the legal profession should use to encourage further ethical behavior. Professor Sanders also highlights "impediments" to an expert's ethical obligations and proposed changes to the legal system. It is definitely worth a read.

The Legal Ethics Committee of the District of Columbia Bar recently ruled that an attorney-client relationship is not created when a lawyer testifies on a party's behalf as an expert witness. The Committee equated the role of an attorney as an expert to that of a non-attorney expert. The Committee noted, however, that an attorney-client relationship can be created if the client reasonably believes that such a relationship exists and the attorney/expert fails to dispel such expectations.

Robert Ambrogi has written a excellent article on the ruling on FindLaw.

An interview in the Metropolitan Corporate Counsel highlights the current state of state court funding, or more appropriately, the lack of funding. The article points out that many state court systems are dealing with clogged dockets, a lack of judicial experience in business law and problems handling large e-discovery matters. Further, it is suggested that state court judges are spending less time scrutinizing the qualifications of expert witnesses, taking the position that such evaluation should be left up to juries. Seems like a good time to bulk up on "qualifications" questions during cross examination.

For more information on this subject, see DRI's Task Force on Judicial Independence, which highlights several recommended judicial reforms, funding issues included.

In the latest edition of the The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel, Steve Schott, Director of Business Development at Round Table Group, provides a thorough explanation detailing how expert witness referral firms conduct "customized expert witness searches" for their clients. These searches go beyond a mere proprietary database search and are specifically tailored to the facts of each case. Further, such searches tend to yield experts who are "true experts," leaders in their respective fields whose distinction goes far beyond just being an expert witness.

The full interview can be found here.