Has Your Work as an Expert Witness Been ?Peer Reviewed’?

In the 1993 Supreme Court case “Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals,” Justice Blackmun said for the unanimous court that an expert’s testimony has to rest on a dependable foundation and has to be relevant to the job at hand. He brought up the key consideration about whether or not the theory or method utilised can be or has been tested and subjected to ‘peer review’ and publication.
Professional witnesses have observed their work rejected and their testimony excluded when they haven’t attended to Daubert standards of peer review.
Identify one more specialist in your field that the court can treat as a peer. So if you are a biomedical engineer, another biomedical engineer would be a peer, and so on. Your attorney can retain this individual to review your work, specifically your expert report. A peer reviewer would supply his own report of findings concerning the subject matter of your expert report. Yes, this might sound like double work, but an increasingly proper and valuable extra step. If an additional expert independently verifies the validity of your work, it will aid to ensure the legal admissibility of that work. In addition, this extra step can bring additional credibility to your work. This will further support the relevancy and reliability of your work, opinion, and testimony.
The peer reviewer need to submit his report directly to the law firm that engaged both of you. By and big, your attorney will submit your expert report, along with the peer reviewer’s report and a CV describing the peer reviewer’s background, training, and abilities. You ought to not have any contact with the peer reviewer after the law firm retains him and before he submits his report back to them. Keep the points of this paragraph in mind simply because, from time to time, you may be hired in a case as a peer reviewer rather than as an professional witness.
At times a peer review is referred to as a third-party review, due to the fact the other party may not be a precise peer, but could still be a specialist in a related field of expertise. You need to use such a third-party reviewer if part of your testimony includes information that is close to, but not particularly component of, your main expertise.