NEXT

New York Law Journal

Dealing with 'Diaz': How Defendants Can Combat and Use Expert Testimony Regarding Group Mental State

Quinn Emanuel partners Michael Packard and Daniel Koffmann discuss the recent decision in 'Diaz v. United States,' where the Supreme Court has given prosecutors the green light to prove defendants' criminal intent by offering expert testimony about the mental state of people "like" the defendant.
13 minute read

Texas Lawyer

The Role of a Forensic Psychiatrist in Committing a Sexually Violent Predator

"Mental health professionals must rely not only on their clinical judgment, but on a thorough forensic evaluation in each case," write Elisa Reiter and Daniel Pollack.
6 minute read

New York Law Journal

Expert Cross-Examination: Creating Maximum Mileage From an Expert's Mistakes

"Effectively cross-examining an expert witness requires more than just identifying errors," write Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan.
8 minute read

The Recorder

'United States v. Lynch': Challenges and Strategies for Defending Against Government Experts Used in Lieu of Percipient Witnesses

"Rather than asking percipient witnesses about the impugned transactions, the government retained an expert to second-guess the very same accounting decisions Autonomy's independent auditors had approved in real time," write Steptoe's Brian Heberlig and Galen Kast.
9 minute read

Daily Business Review

'Slayer Statute' Tested and Failed as Kluger Kaplan Gets Probate Win

In legal action that could have fallen from the pages of a soap opera script, a South Florida law firm successfully defended the husband of a Miami…
4 minute read

Delaware Business Court Insider

Smartmatic, Newsmax at War Over Witnesses in Lawsuit Over Election Defamation

Hundreds of filings in June and July have been made in connection with the motions to block expert testimony. Meanwhile, both sides have filed motions for summary judgment that haven't been decided, and both have moved for the other to be sanctioned or held in contempt.
2 minute read

New York Law Journal

Cumulative Testimony in Medical Malpractice Defense

Cumulative testimony is generally excluded at trial based upon the sound discretion of the trial court, whose obligation it is to control the presentation of the issues to the trier of fact. This scenario arises in cases that involve expert witnesses from multiple specialties but may also occur when there are one or more missing witnesses.
8 minute read

National Law Journal

High Court Says Testimony About 'Most' Drug Mules Not Against the Rules

In its 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that such testimony violated Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b), which prohibits experts from testifying about a defendant's mental state when such knowledge is an element of the crime.
4 minute read

Law.com

After Federal Judge's Dismissal, Zantac Legal Fight Reignites in State Courts

On May 23, the first verdict in the nation over Zantac came out in Illinois, while a Delaware judge's May 31 decision allowed plaintiffs' experts for thousands of cases.
7 minute read

Law.com

Drug Manufacturers Win First Zantac Verdict in the Nation

An Illinois jury sided with pharmaceutical manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline and Boehringer Ingelheim in the first verdict in the Zantac litigation.
3 minute read

Resources

  • Data Management and Analytics: The Key to Success for Legal Operations

    Brought to you by DiliTrust

    Download Now

  • Small Law Firm Playbook: The Expert's Guide to Getting the Most Out of Legal Software

    Brought to you by PracticePanther

    Download Now

  • Strong & Hanni Solves Storage Woes--Learn How You Can, Too

    Brought to you by Filevine

    Download Now

  • Meeting the Requirements of California's SB 553: Workplace Violence Prevention

    Brought to you by NAVEX Global

    Download Now