[0:01] Welcome to The Right Expert with Bob Craig.
[0:06] Hello everyone and welcome back to The Right Expert with Bob Craig.
[0:10] Bob is a managing director and associate general counsel at BRG who helps
[0:16] lawyers identify, select and retain expert witnesses for complex litigation.
[0:21] With more than 50 years of legal experience spanning military service,
[0:25] private practice, academia, and in-house leadership, Bob brings a unique perspective
[0:30] defining the right expert for the right case.
[0:33] I'm Sean O'Connor and today Bob and I are talking about the difference
[0:37] between a good resume and a good expert witness.
[0:41] Hi Bob.
[0:42] How are you doing? Good to talk with you.
[0:44] Same, same, same. I'm interested in this sort of dichotomy resume
[0:50] versus presence on the stands, so to speak.
[0:53] What in your experience separates a strong expert witness from someone
[0:58] with an impressive CV, you know, resume?
[1:02] Let's make it clear. Good witnesses have good resumes.
[1:06] I'm not suggesting at all that an expert can get by just on
[1:15] being a smooth talker if you will.
[1:19] And from the resume, if it's properly put together,
[1:24] it indicates the cases that they've already testified to.
[1:30] So a good resume is critical to an expert in any situation in which
[1:38] they're seeking to be retained for new work.
[1:43] What differentiates is not so much whether they're a good expert or have a good CV,
[1:53] but really whether there are things about them and their capabilities
[2:01] and if you will knowledge of the general legal process that make them
[2:08] able to take all that they know and put it in words that can be understood
[2:17] by the fact finder, usually a jury, often a judge or an arbitrator.
[2:23] And it's really a skill set that doesn't necessarily come simply
[2:31] from the fact you're an expert in a specific topic.
[2:35] So one of these to look for with experts is whether they've testified.
[2:42] Obviously if they've testified a number of times somebody's liking what they're saying
[2:47] or how they're saying it which is really more important.
[2:50] And so that's an indication from a resume or from a CV whether they're in fact
[2:59] a good testifying expert.
[3:04] But I think what I believe is important is an understanding of the personality
[3:14] of not only the expert but also the lawyer that in fact is requesting the expert.
[3:22] And if you know and I don't always but if you know the judge or the fact finder,
[3:30] how's that expert going to play is really what I'm saying.
[3:35] And that can be a factor not not so much about the personalities of the expert of the lawyer
[3:44] but whether those click and whether from those relationships they can they can get the story
[3:52] in front of the jury.
[3:54] Yeah, I love that whole I mean this comes up time and again in my conversations
[3:59] with the attorneys and that you know the human factor and you know you're in some ways
[4:04] you're you know you're talking about chemistry you know with the fact finder with the judge
[4:09] and you would know like okay this expert's a little too high on their horse so to speak
[4:14] or whatever it might be and it's fascinating that that kind of thing comes into play.
[4:19] But you know what's your opinion about like how much should lawyers rely on you know the titles
[4:26] you know the published work industry reputation academic credentials when they're when they're he said
[4:36] you're saying three to four different things there.
[4:39] Yeah I mean they're all I mean like you said you want someone with a good resume but a resume alone.
[4:45] So I mean is it just simply you know when you see it or how much should that stuff weigh in?
[4:50] Is it case dependent?
[4:51] It's case dependent.
[4:53] One of the things that lawyers often do let me put it two ways.
[4:58] One thing some lawyers do is I just hear that they need an expert and then we talk through what kind of expert they need.
[5:06] They don't really have a good idea.
[5:09] Other times they'll come and they'll have so many specifics that they're looking for on that CV
[5:19] that I have to sit back and say okay when you find that person tell me it's a unicorn.
[5:27] Yeah that's if they start looking for a unicorn they're going to have a hard time being comfortable with the fact that there is a lot of expertise that is brought to the table by these testifying experts.
[5:49] That allow them to be able to handle different situations.
[5:55] And the judges have the same problem.
[5:58] I'm actually aware of a case where the judge refused to let the expert testify about damages because the expert had never worked in the industry that was a question at trial.
[6:13] Which is really I don't want to say absurd but it's a misunderstanding of the way that an expert goes about his or her business.
[6:28] Yeah.
[6:29] Yeah, credentials are important but having testified is important.
[6:39] Oftentimes that's a critical element to the lawyer.
[6:44] Have they testified before?
[6:48] Yeah.
[6:49] Which makes it very hard for me to introduce an expert who hasn't had that opportunity yet.
[6:58] It's very difficult for the person who comes through the ranks as an expert academically or perhaps working for one of the companies like BRG to get that first assignment to act like testify.
[7:20] Then when they have that, I was going to ask you about that transition, you know, like going from pure subject matter authority or you know SM SME as they call them in the trades now into an active litigation role.
[7:37] Are you are you training them up or what matters most.
[7:41] Well, we certainly with regard to our younger emerging experts offer them training on issues related to testify whether a deposition or trial.
[7:54] But it's one of those worlds that you have to have been in the battle once or twice to really say I've got that experience.
[8:07] And so it's important to find those cases where maybe at cost, the cost might be a little less to have an expert who doesn't have that experience but is certainly skilled in the in the topic of an issue.
[8:30] Get them I like to get an emerging experts on the stand every chance I get because once they're on once, then they can say I've testified.
[8:40] Yeah, yeah, it's that I want a job but I have to have the job to get the job, you know, contradiction and we all face in life.
[8:49] I always analogize it to being a manager and baseball. I mean, it's always amazing how many managers get fired and then get hired again.
[8:59] And it's because the ownership can say I'm not making a decision. This person can be a manager. Somebody already has made that decision.
[9:10] All I'm making a decision on is whether they can do it differently at my team.
[9:19] Yeah, you're back to your back to approach and personality fit again, but what what tells you, you know, like what are the warning signs that tell you a candidate may be accomplished in their field but not necessarily cut out for testifying work.
[9:39] The confidence is probably the biggest, biggest word that I can use to describe most good testifying experts, but they don't have to there's not a magic appearance or a magic way they speak or so forth.
[10:07] Really, you can tell how they explain their thoughts in an interview, for instance, that they can break things down in a way that are going to be understood by the jury.
[10:30] Yeah, I guess I can say, honestly, that there are some folks that I've met that are truly experts, but, but they are reluctant to, the reluctant are, are not really skilled at taking it to the courtroom.
[10:46] Yeah, that's interesting.
[10:48] I was going to say that it reminds me of the idea that one can be really good at a, you know, at mathematics, let's say, or really good at a sport, but you're not necessarily a good teacher, even though you can do it, you know.
[11:08] That's very true. The other thing that's really important besides confidence, I would say, is appreciation of their role at trial and an understanding of what's going on around them in the trial setting.
[11:24] Now, younger experts and maybe some academics can get to that point in their early stages when they see and are helping others get to that go to trial, but you do, the best experts really do have an appreciation of their position, their role at the trial.
[11:54] And sometimes it's critical, sometimes there are the essence of what the lawyer has to do to win his case or her case, and other times they're merely a bridge from one point to another.
[12:09] And they're not, there's no need to do more than just get in and get out.
[12:17] It is, you know, you mentioned earlier, the manager of baseball, I mean, the sports analogy holds up here in the sense of, you know, there's a team typically that's, you know, going in and playing this game called, you know, litigation, let's say, and, you know, you're, you're, you're just coming into bad cleanup here, you're not, you're not doing whatever, you know, like it's, you've got, we need something specific from you, don't overreach, I hear in that a little bit.
[12:45] I think one of our other things we'll talk about at some point is, is exactly the issue of overreaching and, and holding to the opinion, but those are, those are skill sets that are, that are very important for the, the good expert as well, because they don't want to be.
[13:09] Don't want to be lured into areas where they don't have the expertise, or they don't have the facts.
[13:17] Yeah, it's that's like mansplaining gone wrong.
[13:23] Question and this may be, may be related.
[13:26] Have you, have you been in a situation where like, you know, highly qualified candidate, you know, on paper, just was not the right expert for the assignment.
[13:37] Well, sure, I guess I have more in my practice than in what I've done in the last 18 years in placing experts.
[13:47] I have seen experts on the stand who, it's, it's generally don't understand what the role is, or attempt to make their role larger.
[14:03] I don't think I've ever seen an expert collapse completely.
[14:13] If they, if they properly prepared, but you know, it's nice to see an expert who happens to be on the other side fall in, in the wake of great cross examination, and that can happen as well.
[14:33] I think, I think the, the expert that, that over reaches is the one that gets caught at trial.
[14:42] Yeah, and, and they really have nowhere to go when it's turn, when it turns out something they've done is, is, is it over reach.
[14:52] Yeah, you, you can't underign the bell, so to speak, and that you end up undermining your credibility.
[14:59] It's interesting because I think just from a personality point of view, there's, you know, and this is a broad generalization, but I think of certain experts in my head and doctors, I've met attorneys that I've met, people who are, you know, learned people.
[15:14] Sometimes they don't like being challenged, so to speak, and I can see how that, that kind of, you'd need to chest for that, you know, before you put them on the stand, so to speak.
[15:26] You know, more often than not, an expert's going to give a deposition, rather than go to trials, trials are rarer than depositions, if you will.
[15:37] And I do have an experience with an expert, in that case, in this case, a medical expert, but, sort of, it wasn't my expert, it wasn't somebody I'd placed, but I watched, and I swear the expert was waiting for the judge to walk through the door of the deposition and say, you're right, you win.
[16:08] And, you know, that kind of expert is not usually the kind that I like to place into depositions and trials.
[16:24] Yeah, no, I, I, I hear you on that, and I want to, I want to wrap up, because as, as always, we run up against time here, but, you know, talking to the lawyers out there that are listening, you know, what questions do you think they should be asking before, you know, just assuming the strongest resumes can produce say the strongest expert witness, so they're, you know, they're three key filters, they should be using, so to speak, what would you say?
[16:51] Well, you need to understand whether they have been, their opinions have been disallowed for legitimate reasons, or reasons related to the dog air.
[17:10] That's, you always have to ask that question, some of the, oftentimes you get into, into the facts, the case, but I, I like a question like, tell me your toughest cross examination, and, and what happened in it.
[17:33] Particularly where you know you're, you're getting an expert that's that's perhaps got that experience and wants to, and you want to get a feel for how they react to that.
[17:50] So those, you know, that, and credentials are, are, are two of the things that I would, would suggest.
[18:02] Yeah, kind of a trifecta there. I get it. Bob, super interesting. Thank you for sharing your expertise on this. I look forward to connecting on, on a future episode.
[18:15] Great. Thank you very much. Appreciate it, Sean.
[18:18] You bet. That's it for today's episode of the right expert with Bob Craig. If you'd like to learn more about Bob and BRG's work in expert services and complex litigation support.
[18:31] Visit their website, thinkbrg.com. As always, thanks for listening, and don't forget, like, subscribe for the show. Maybe share this episode with someone, maybe an attorney in your world who is on the lookout for expert witnesses. I'm Sean O'Connor. Have a great day.
[0:06] Hello everyone and welcome back to The Right Expert with Bob Craig.
[0:10] Bob is a managing director and associate general counsel at BRG who helps
[0:16] lawyers identify, select and retain expert witnesses for complex litigation.
[0:21] With more than 50 years of legal experience spanning military service,
[0:25] private practice, academia, and in-house leadership, Bob brings a unique perspective
[0:30] defining the right expert for the right case.
[0:33] I'm Sean O'Connor and today Bob and I are talking about the difference
[0:37] between a good resume and a good expert witness.
[0:41] Hi Bob.
[0:42] How are you doing? Good to talk with you.
[0:44] Same, same, same. I'm interested in this sort of dichotomy resume
[0:50] versus presence on the stands, so to speak.
[0:53] What in your experience separates a strong expert witness from someone
[0:58] with an impressive CV, you know, resume?
[1:02] Let's make it clear. Good witnesses have good resumes.
[1:06] I'm not suggesting at all that an expert can get by just on
[1:15] being a smooth talker if you will.
[1:19] And from the resume, if it's properly put together,
[1:24] it indicates the cases that they've already testified to.
[1:30] So a good resume is critical to an expert in any situation in which
[1:38] they're seeking to be retained for new work.
[1:43] What differentiates is not so much whether they're a good expert or have a good CV,
[1:53] but really whether there are things about them and their capabilities
[2:01] and if you will knowledge of the general legal process that make them
[2:08] able to take all that they know and put it in words that can be understood
[2:17] by the fact finder, usually a jury, often a judge or an arbitrator.
[2:23] And it's really a skill set that doesn't necessarily come simply
[2:31] from the fact you're an expert in a specific topic.
[2:35] So one of these to look for with experts is whether they've testified.
[2:42] Obviously if they've testified a number of times somebody's liking what they're saying
[2:47] or how they're saying it which is really more important.
[2:50] And so that's an indication from a resume or from a CV whether they're in fact
[2:59] a good testifying expert.
[3:04] But I think what I believe is important is an understanding of the personality
[3:14] of not only the expert but also the lawyer that in fact is requesting the expert.
[3:22] And if you know and I don't always but if you know the judge or the fact finder,
[3:30] how's that expert going to play is really what I'm saying.
[3:35] And that can be a factor not not so much about the personalities of the expert of the lawyer
[3:44] but whether those click and whether from those relationships they can they can get the story
[3:52] in front of the jury.
[3:54] Yeah, I love that whole I mean this comes up time and again in my conversations
[3:59] with the attorneys and that you know the human factor and you know you're in some ways
[4:04] you're you know you're talking about chemistry you know with the fact finder with the judge
[4:09] and you would know like okay this expert's a little too high on their horse so to speak
[4:14] or whatever it might be and it's fascinating that that kind of thing comes into play.
[4:19] But you know what's your opinion about like how much should lawyers rely on you know the titles
[4:26] you know the published work industry reputation academic credentials when they're when they're he said
[4:36] you're saying three to four different things there.
[4:39] Yeah I mean they're all I mean like you said you want someone with a good resume but a resume alone.
[4:45] So I mean is it just simply you know when you see it or how much should that stuff weigh in?
[4:50] Is it case dependent?
[4:51] It's case dependent.
[4:53] One of the things that lawyers often do let me put it two ways.
[4:58] One thing some lawyers do is I just hear that they need an expert and then we talk through what kind of expert they need.
[5:06] They don't really have a good idea.
[5:09] Other times they'll come and they'll have so many specifics that they're looking for on that CV
[5:19] that I have to sit back and say okay when you find that person tell me it's a unicorn.
[5:27] Yeah that's if they start looking for a unicorn they're going to have a hard time being comfortable with the fact that there is a lot of expertise that is brought to the table by these testifying experts.
[5:49] That allow them to be able to handle different situations.
[5:55] And the judges have the same problem.
[5:58] I'm actually aware of a case where the judge refused to let the expert testify about damages because the expert had never worked in the industry that was a question at trial.
[6:13] Which is really I don't want to say absurd but it's a misunderstanding of the way that an expert goes about his or her business.
[6:28] Yeah.
[6:29] Yeah, credentials are important but having testified is important.
[6:39] Oftentimes that's a critical element to the lawyer.
[6:44] Have they testified before?
[6:48] Yeah.
[6:49] Which makes it very hard for me to introduce an expert who hasn't had that opportunity yet.
[6:58] It's very difficult for the person who comes through the ranks as an expert academically or perhaps working for one of the companies like BRG to get that first assignment to act like testify.
[7:20] Then when they have that, I was going to ask you about that transition, you know, like going from pure subject matter authority or you know SM SME as they call them in the trades now into an active litigation role.
[7:37] Are you are you training them up or what matters most.
[7:41] Well, we certainly with regard to our younger emerging experts offer them training on issues related to testify whether a deposition or trial.
[7:54] But it's one of those worlds that you have to have been in the battle once or twice to really say I've got that experience.
[8:07] And so it's important to find those cases where maybe at cost, the cost might be a little less to have an expert who doesn't have that experience but is certainly skilled in the in the topic of an issue.
[8:30] Get them I like to get an emerging experts on the stand every chance I get because once they're on once, then they can say I've testified.
[8:40] Yeah, yeah, it's that I want a job but I have to have the job to get the job, you know, contradiction and we all face in life.
[8:49] I always analogize it to being a manager and baseball. I mean, it's always amazing how many managers get fired and then get hired again.
[8:59] And it's because the ownership can say I'm not making a decision. This person can be a manager. Somebody already has made that decision.
[9:10] All I'm making a decision on is whether they can do it differently at my team.
[9:19] Yeah, you're back to your back to approach and personality fit again, but what what tells you, you know, like what are the warning signs that tell you a candidate may be accomplished in their field but not necessarily cut out for testifying work.
[9:39] The confidence is probably the biggest, biggest word that I can use to describe most good testifying experts, but they don't have to there's not a magic appearance or a magic way they speak or so forth.
[10:07] Really, you can tell how they explain their thoughts in an interview, for instance, that they can break things down in a way that are going to be understood by the jury.
[10:30] Yeah, I guess I can say, honestly, that there are some folks that I've met that are truly experts, but, but they are reluctant to, the reluctant are, are not really skilled at taking it to the courtroom.
[10:46] Yeah, that's interesting.
[10:48] I was going to say that it reminds me of the idea that one can be really good at a, you know, at mathematics, let's say, or really good at a sport, but you're not necessarily a good teacher, even though you can do it, you know.
[11:08] That's very true. The other thing that's really important besides confidence, I would say, is appreciation of their role at trial and an understanding of what's going on around them in the trial setting.
[11:24] Now, younger experts and maybe some academics can get to that point in their early stages when they see and are helping others get to that go to trial, but you do, the best experts really do have an appreciation of their position, their role at the trial.
[11:54] And sometimes it's critical, sometimes there are the essence of what the lawyer has to do to win his case or her case, and other times they're merely a bridge from one point to another.
[12:09] And they're not, there's no need to do more than just get in and get out.
[12:17] It is, you know, you mentioned earlier, the manager of baseball, I mean, the sports analogy holds up here in the sense of, you know, there's a team typically that's, you know, going in and playing this game called, you know, litigation, let's say, and, you know, you're, you're, you're just coming into bad cleanup here, you're not, you're not doing whatever, you know, like it's, you've got, we need something specific from you, don't overreach, I hear in that a little bit.
[12:45] I think one of our other things we'll talk about at some point is, is exactly the issue of overreaching and, and holding to the opinion, but those are, those are skill sets that are, that are very important for the, the good expert as well, because they don't want to be.
[13:09] Don't want to be lured into areas where they don't have the expertise, or they don't have the facts.
[13:17] Yeah, it's that's like mansplaining gone wrong.
[13:23] Question and this may be, may be related.
[13:26] Have you, have you been in a situation where like, you know, highly qualified candidate, you know, on paper, just was not the right expert for the assignment.
[13:37] Well, sure, I guess I have more in my practice than in what I've done in the last 18 years in placing experts.
[13:47] I have seen experts on the stand who, it's, it's generally don't understand what the role is, or attempt to make their role larger.
[14:03] I don't think I've ever seen an expert collapse completely.
[14:13] If they, if they properly prepared, but you know, it's nice to see an expert who happens to be on the other side fall in, in the wake of great cross examination, and that can happen as well.
[14:33] I think, I think the, the expert that, that over reaches is the one that gets caught at trial.
[14:42] Yeah, and, and they really have nowhere to go when it's turn, when it turns out something they've done is, is, is it over reach.
[14:52] Yeah, you, you can't underign the bell, so to speak, and that you end up undermining your credibility.
[14:59] It's interesting because I think just from a personality point of view, there's, you know, and this is a broad generalization, but I think of certain experts in my head and doctors, I've met attorneys that I've met, people who are, you know, learned people.
[15:14] Sometimes they don't like being challenged, so to speak, and I can see how that, that kind of, you'd need to chest for that, you know, before you put them on the stand, so to speak.
[15:26] You know, more often than not, an expert's going to give a deposition, rather than go to trials, trials are rarer than depositions, if you will.
[15:37] And I do have an experience with an expert, in that case, in this case, a medical expert, but, sort of, it wasn't my expert, it wasn't somebody I'd placed, but I watched, and I swear the expert was waiting for the judge to walk through the door of the deposition and say, you're right, you win.
[16:08] And, you know, that kind of expert is not usually the kind that I like to place into depositions and trials.
[16:24] Yeah, no, I, I, I hear you on that, and I want to, I want to wrap up, because as, as always, we run up against time here, but, you know, talking to the lawyers out there that are listening, you know, what questions do you think they should be asking before, you know, just assuming the strongest resumes can produce say the strongest expert witness, so they're, you know, they're three key filters, they should be using, so to speak, what would you say?
[16:51] Well, you need to understand whether they have been, their opinions have been disallowed for legitimate reasons, or reasons related to the dog air.
[17:10] That's, you always have to ask that question, some of the, oftentimes you get into, into the facts, the case, but I, I like a question like, tell me your toughest cross examination, and, and what happened in it.
[17:33] Particularly where you know you're, you're getting an expert that's that's perhaps got that experience and wants to, and you want to get a feel for how they react to that.
[17:50] So those, you know, that, and credentials are, are, are two of the things that I would, would suggest.
[18:02] Yeah, kind of a trifecta there. I get it. Bob, super interesting. Thank you for sharing your expertise on this. I look forward to connecting on, on a future episode.
[18:15] Great. Thank you very much. Appreciate it, Sean.
[18:18] You bet. That's it for today's episode of the right expert with Bob Craig. If you'd like to learn more about Bob and BRG's work in expert services and complex litigation support.
[18:31] Visit their website, thinkbrg.com. As always, thanks for listening, and don't forget, like, subscribe for the show. Maybe share this episode with someone, maybe an attorney in your world who is on the lookout for expert witnesses. I'm Sean O'Connor. Have a great day.
