Engaging Experts

Our guest, Dr. Stephan Athan is the owner of Athan Engineering, a full-service engineering consulting firm. He is a sought-after expert witness with a wide range of engineering expertise including patent infringement, invalidity, and technical domestic industry products. Dr. Athan holds a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of South Florida. 

In this episode…

In actions that go to trial, the jury’s perception is everything, according to Dr. Athan. We discuss the importance of communicating technical topics using understandable analogies and maintaining credibility by connecting with jurors. 

Check out the entire episode as we explore “smoking gun” moments during trial, collaboration, and receiving honest feedback.

Don Parent is the founder of Parent Technology Group, LLC, a mechanical and electrical engineering consulting and expert witness firm. He is a Licensed Professional Engineer with over thirty years of experience and has been awarded over two dozen US and International patents. Mr. Parent holds a master's in mechanical engineering from Stanford.

In this episode…

Mr. Parent refers to a solid working relationship between expert and attorney as a “positive feedback loop,” noting that the inquisitive nature of attorneys and his engineering background are complementary forces. Experts who absorb some of the legal complexities can better intuit where questioning may lead, and answer accordingly. Similarly, attorneys can leverage a deeper understanding of the subject matter into a more comprehensive representation for clients.

Check out the whole episode for our discussion on representing plaintiffs vs. defendants, scene graphics, and the role of neutrality.

Our guest, Professor Michael Risch is the Vice Dean at Villanova’s Charles Widger School of Law, where he is a well-published author in IP and Internet Law in numerous law journals and has a full-service IP consultancy. Professor Risch holds a J.D. from the University of Chicago, and an A.B. from Stanford.  

In this episode . . . 

Keeping legal conclusions out of expert opinions is an important skill, according to Professor Risch. This is significantly more difficult for attorneys who become expert witnesses, but it is crucial, regardless of background. Opposing counsel will jump at the opportunity to impeach legal conclusions couched as expert opinions, he advises. 

Tune in for the full episode, including our discussions on levity in the courtroom, consistency, and relatability in court.

In this episode... 

Today’s guest, Paul Sibenik is the CEO of CryptoForensics Investigators, a blockchain forensic accounting firm. He is an expert in numerous areas ranging from investment fraud to ransomware and has over five years of expert witness experience. Mr. Sibenik has a BA in Political Science from York University.  

When drafting an expert witness report in a cutting-edge field like crypto, Mr. Sibenik always summarizes key points by analogy, as often judges and other parties to the proceeding are laypersons. Additionally, he notes that not everyone will read the middle of a report, so it is crucial to have a solid introduction and conclusion which set the foundation for testimony.  

Check out the full episode for our discussion on setting up expectations during the initial interview and staying tuned in to your field of expertise. 

Our guest, Stephen Pope is a software developer, IP expert, and consultant through FASTLab, where he develops advanced multimedia and AI software for a variety of applications. He has over 25 years of experience as an expert witness, and over 100 published technical papers. Mr. Pope holds a BS in Electrical Engineering from Cornell. 

In larger cases, it is not uncommon to work on a team with other expert witnesses. Mr. Pope notes that while each expert has a particular part to play, often, not every expert will testify. It is therefore crucial that the testifying experts work with consulting experts to get up-to-speed on the report. 

Check out the full episode for our discussion, which includes the two-way vetting process, having sufficient experience, and working on both the plaintiff and defendant side.

Our guest, Mike Favetta, is the owner of WeatherPrep LLC, a meteorology consulting firm. He has over sixteen years of broadcast experience and is an expert in meteorology, climatology, and environmental matters. Mr. Favetta holds a BS in Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology from Keane University. 

Expert Witnesses need to be on the same page as their engaging attorneys before putting pen to paper. Mr. Favetta advises addressing the scope of the initial call and revisiting it throughout the process to avoid wasting time on superfluous matters and keeping within budget. 

Check out the full episode for further discussion on initial forays into expert witnessing, demeanor in court, and mentoring.

Dr. Edwin Hernandez is the founder of both EGLA Corp, a full-service IP and Tech consulting firm; and EGLAVATOR, a tech incubator. He is an expert in artificial intelligence (AI) and wireless software and serves on multiple IEEE boards. Dr. Hernandez holds over a dozen patents, and a Ph.D. in Computer Engineering from the University of Florida.  

In this episode…  

Our guest, Dr. Edwin Hernandez, is active in multiple fields of expertise that have established him as a proficient expert witness. Attending conferences and industry events, reviewing technical papers, and investing in the future through his own initiatives, helps keep him well-informed in very dynamic pursuits such as AI and machine learning. Knowledge is important, and in the fast world of tech, staying current is key.  

Check out the full episode for our discussion on collaborating with expert teams, sticking to your report, and the intersection of technology and expert witness work. 

In this episode…

Our guest, Professor Rand Decker teaches Civil Engineering, Environmental Engineering, and Construction Management at Northern Arizona University. He is the author of numerous scholarly works on cold environment engineering and has over thirty years of experience in expert witnessing. Professor Decker holds a Ph.D. in Cold Regions Engineering from Montana State.

Professor Decker finds that engagements are far more successful when attorneys and expert witnesses work together to fill knowledge gaps, ultimately weaving a more effective advocacy for the client. He explains, “I think it's important for the attorney and the experts to agree on the meta questions behind the technical issues and the litigation, because once you agree on the foundational issues, then it's sort of hard to fall off the edge of the world because you can get those established early on.”

Be sure to check out the whole episode, for our discussion on expert niches, the public good, and demonstrating expertise.

Dean Barron is owner of twobluecats.com, a full-service statistical analysis consulting firm with a broad range of specialties, ranging from regression analysis to Ph.D. thesis preparation. With over 25 years of experience, he is a sought-after expert witness and published author. Mr. Baron holds an MS in statistics from Cal State Long Beach.

In this episode…

Time management starts with an understanding between the expert witness and the engaging attorney. Mr. Barron sets up expectations beforehand by directly asking what the expected hour count is, taking into account the amount of time available before the report is due. Tight time frames can be overcome with proper planning and possible extensions, he notes.

Be sure to check out the entire episode for our discussions on organization, the importance of academic achievement, and small details with big impacts on cases.

John Catlett owns J.D. Catlett Consulting, LLC, a full-service building and fire code consulting firm. He has over thirty years of experience in management, training, proposals, implementation compliance and more. Mr. Catlett has worked as a fire marshal, maintenance code official, and building plan reviewer and is a sought-after expert witness with over a decade of experience.

In this episode...

Mr. Catlett, advises a “three-p approach” to depositions and trials: “prepare, prepare, prepare”. Needing to refer back to your report as little as possible, establishes an air of preparedness and authority over the material and shuts down many of the opposition’s potential avenues of attack. There can be long delays between writing reports and depositions or trials, so Mr. Catlett recommends rereading case materials as important dates approach.

Be sure to check out the entire episode for tips on vetting, getting experience in the courtroom, and shifting expert roles.