One of the most potent means of undermining the credibility of witnesses is to expose them as biased for or against a party, or as having an interest in the outcome of the litigation. Evidence of bias, interest or hostility is directly probative of a witness’ credibility and is not merely collateral in nature.1 Therefore, a cross-examiner may impeach a witness as biased by admitting extrinsic evidence, such as by calling other witnesses or admitting documentary evidence.2
Two areas of potential bias that have been the subject of litigation in malpractice actions involve defendants who have settled with plaintiffs prior to taking the witness stand, and physician witnesses who are insured by the same liability carrier as a defendant. In the former circumstance, the witness is theoretically biased toward the plaintiff—although in reality it is doubtful that a doctor who has settled and no longer has anything to gain would testify in support of a plaintiff that sued him or her. The latter situation involves potential bias for the defense because a verdict that has to be paid by the insurance company may have a financial impact on the witness, particularly with mutual or reciprocal insurance companies, which are owned by the policyholders or subscribers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
