A crop can look fine from the road and still be in freefall, and a “damaged” tree can be one good growing season away from recovery. That gray zone is where expert witnesses earn their keep, and where bad assumptions can turn into huge losses.

We sit down with Dr. Mark Czarnota, associate professor of horticulture at the University of Georgia, to unpack what happens when weed science, herbicide drift, and plant physiology collide with legal deadlines. He shares how expert witness engagements actually arrive, why staying current in pesticide research and specialty crop systems is a daily job, and what it takes to explain technical findings to attorneys, insurers, and lay readers without watering down the science. We also get practical about credentials that come up in court, including certified arborist expectations and pesticide licensing.

Dr. Czarnota walks through depositions from the expert chair, including how lawyers try to corner new witnesses, why sticking to facts protects your credibility, and the courtroom lesson that led to a mistrial early in his career. We dig into report writing strategy, valuation challenges for injured ornamentals and trees, and the contract clauses experts must read closely before signing. If you work in agricultural litigation, horticulture litigation, or any technical field where the truth has to survive cross-examination, this conversation maps the terrain.

Subscribe for more expert-focused conversations, share this with someone who testifies for a living, and leave a review with the most important rule you think every expert witness should follow.