In a perfect world, the facts of a case, when well presented by the trial lawyer, should determine the outcome of the trial. We are not living in a perfect world.
Today, more than at any other time in the history of our profession, many cases are won or lost on the testimony of the expert witness. So, exactly what does an "expert" look like, and how do you find the right one? By definition, an expert is a person with specialized knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education which qualifies that person to form helpful opinions for a party in anticipation for litigation or preparation for trial.
The Daubert Decision
Not that long ago, an expert was almost anyone who had a higher education than the next guy, or maybe a license or certification in a specialized area. Since the landmark United States Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993), and a growing number of similar holdings under the laws of different states, the environment of expert selection and presentation has changed forever. Daubert changed the standard of proof for admitting expert testimony and caused the legal world to focus more and more upon the expert witness's methodology rather than merely upon his or her credentials as an "expert." In Texas, and a number of other states, the standard has been extended to non-scientific areas as well, such as accounting. As the new "gatekeeper" of expert testimony, the court will not permit an expert to testify unless it is satisfied that he or she has both sufficient and valid credentials and a reliable and peer tested methodology.
So what does this mean to you, the client? The one whose business survival and financial well being has suddenly become dependent largely upon the opinion of one person, the expert? It means that you (and your trial counsel) can no longer just roam through the phone book to look for a likely candidate. Instead, you have to become intimately familiar with the expert candidate's résumé and his or her educational qualifications and specialized experience, and you have to spend hours working with the candidate to ensure a full understanding of your unique circumstances and needs in order to make certain that he or she is the right one for the job. And, after your careful selection process is finished, you then have to spend countless more hours to work with your expert to hone his or her presentation so that it presents exactly the right emphasis, the right sound and feel, the right blend of organization and, well, passion, and, perhaps most importantly, unquestioned credibility.
Opposing counsel will, post-Daubert, do their best to undermine your expert's reputation and reliability. They will put your expert's expertise on trial before they can even provide an analysis of the evidence in the actual case at hand. Selecting the right expert for your needs is no easy task, but diligent work with experienced trial counsel in the selection and preparation process pays invaluable dividends.