Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Everyone's an Expert
All of us who are interested in criminal law have seen the 'Battle of the Experts' ad nauseum. The prosecution trots out an 'expert' with enough acronyms after his or her name to impress the entire courtroom, and a CV extraordinaire, and that person, under oath, states his and her opinion with great authority.Next comes the opposing side's 'expert,' with an equal amount of acronyms and an equally impressive CV, who states the exact opposite under oath. Who do you believe? Who is truly an expert?With that kind of question in mind, The Matrimonial Strategist this month is running a provocative, thought-provoking article entitled 'The Failure of Peer Review,' by David A. Martindale and Jonathan Gould. The authors state, 'We hope to create for the reader a healthy skepticism about the process, and shed light on assumptions that we believe are often made by colleagues, attorneys and judges about the academic rigor and scientific integrity of [the peer review process].Although in this case the authors were aiming their warnings at matrimonial and family law attorneys, these same warnings apply throughout the area of law. Who really ARE your experts? Are they what they say they are? Do their CVs accurately reflect their careers in the field you are looking for? How do you know? Is there someone in your firm who has the time and the expertise to thoroughly search a potential expert's background, and to learn exactly how he or she performs in the courtroom?This is not meant in any way to demean a true 'expert' who has spent long years in his or her field of expertise. But it's easy to be fooled, and I wonder, as do the authors of the article mentioned above, whether in fact some attorneys and judges place too much faith in opinions that may not really be valid.Something to think about?
All of us who are interested in criminal law have seen the 'Battle of the Experts' ad nauseum. The prosecution trots out an 'expert' with enough acronyms after his or her name to impress the entire courtroom, and a CV extraordinaire, and that person, under oath, states his and her opinion with great authority.Next comes the opposing side's 'expert,' with an equal amount of acronyms and an equally impressive CV, who states the exact opposite under oath. Who do you believe? Who is truly an expert?With that kind of question in mind, The Matrimonial Strategist this month is running a provocative, thought-provoking article entitled 'The Failure of Peer Review,' by David A. Martindale and Jonathan Gould. The authors state, 'We hope to create for the reader a healthy skepticism about the process, and shed light on assumptions that we believe are often made by colleagues, attorneys and judges about the academic rigor and scientific integrity of [the peer review process].Although in this case the authors were aiming their warnings at matrimonial and family law attorneys, these same warnings apply throughout the area of law. Who really ARE your experts? Are they what they say they are? Do their CVs accurately reflect their careers in the field you are looking for? How do you know? Is there someone in your firm who has the time and the expertise to thoroughly search a potential expert's background, and to learn exactly how he or she performs in the courtroom?This is not meant in any way to demean a true 'expert' who has spent long years in his or her field of expertise. But it's easy to be fooled, and I wonder, as do the authors of the article mentioned above, whether in fact some attorneys and judges place too much faith in opinions that may not really be valid.Something to think about?
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.