Glossary · Evidence
Expert Witness
A qualified specialist retained to give opinion testimony on issues requiring specialized knowledge, indispensable in medical malpractice for establishing the standard of care, breach, and causation.
Also known as: medical expert, expert opinion witness
What it is
An expert witness is a person qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education to give opinion testimony on subjects beyond the common understanding of the jury. In medical malpractice, expert testimony is required (by statute or evidentiary rule in essentially every US jurisdiction) to establish the applicable standard of care, the defendant's breach of that standard, and the causal link between the breach and the plaintiff's injury.
Qualification standards
The expert must be qualified in the relevant specialty. Most states require the expert to practice in the same or a substantially similar specialty as the defendant. Some states impose additional requirements: a minimum number of years in active practice, board certification, or active clinical involvement at the time of testimony. The trial judge serves as the gatekeeper for expert qualification under the Daubert or Frye standard, depending on jurisdiction.
Cost and case economics
Expert testimony is expensive. Standard-of-care experts, causation experts, and life-care planners can each charge tens of thousands of dollars per case for review, deposition, and trial testimony. The economic burden falls heavily on plaintiff counsel, who typically advances expert costs on contingency. This is one of the practical reasons malpractice firms decline cases with marginal merit.
In settlement strategy
The quality and credentials of retained experts strongly influence settlement value. A defendant with a poorly-credentialed standard-of-care defense expert is at a settlement disadvantage; a plaintiff with a nationally-recognized expert in the relevant subspecialty commands a higher demand.
See Also
- Standard of Care — The level of skill, diligence, and judgment a reasonably competent practitioner in the same specialty would exercise under similar circumstances, used as the benchmark for proving negligence in a malpractice case.
- Daubert Standard — The federal evidentiary test, from Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), that requires expert testimony to be both relevant and reliable, with the trial judge serving as gatekeeper.
- Affidavit of Merit — A sworn statement by a qualified expert, required at filing or shortly after in many states, attesting that the malpractice claim has reasonable factual and medical merit.