Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Recent Decision Provides Guidance on Admissibility of Expert Testimony
Improper use of experts in product liability cases is all too familiar. The proper use of an expert's specialized knowledge or expertise is to assist the trier of fact to determine a fact at issue. Some lawyers, however, use experts merely as sounding boards to highlight key facts and argue conclusory inferences in support of a party's case. These “experts” are typically offered as “historians” and arbiters of “ethical” conduct.
A recent decision by Judge Lewis E. Kaplan of the Southern District of New York in the Rezulin multi-district litigation slammed the door on the practice of “engag[ing] … 'expert' witnesses whose intended role is more to argue the client's cause from the witness stand than to bring to the fact-finder specialized knowledge or expertise that would be helpful in resolving the issues of fact presented by the lawsuit.” In re Rezulin Prod. Liab. Litig., 309 F. Supp. 2d 531, 538 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (“Rezulin”). These so-called experts “lend their credentials and reputations to the party who calls them, without bringing much, if any, relevant knowledge to bear on the facts actually at issue.” Id. Courts are becoming increasingly sensitive to this problem. For example, in Summers v. A.L. Gilbert Co., 69 Cal. App. 4th 1155, 1185 (1999), the California Court of Appeal found that “[r]eading [plaintiffs' expert]'s testimony in its entirety, we conclude that he was advocating, not testifying. In essence, cloaked with the impressive mantle of 'expert,' [plaintiffs' expert] made plaintiffs' closing argument from the witness stand.”
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.