When is Expert Witness Testimony Relevant?

Attorneys often turn to expert witnesses to help demonstrate and provide foundation for the factual bases for their clients’ claims or defenses. An expert is someone who knows something beyond common experience, who can help your legal team to prove information you could not. Their "expertise" in the field - their background and experience - qualifies them to present nuisances and facts that could be pertinent to your case. 

Though it may seem like a valuable advantage at trial, expert witness testimony is not appropriate in every case. So when is expert witness testimony relevant? 

First, when determining if you need an expert witness, ask yourself if your case would benefit from specific knowledge or facts that only a hired witness could contribute. This could include the scope of a complicated banking case or even a big picture question that needs to have detail to accurately explain the issue to the judge or jury. When dealing with financial institutions and banking cases in particular, the content of the subject matter can quickly become quite difficult to understand. 

There is general agreement that an expert should be involved in a case as early as possible: in technical analysis, preparing for deposition, during discovery, analyzing documents in settlement and mediation discussions, and summing up complex facts for jurors. 

Keep in mind that one expert witness is often better than two or more. The more opinions, the higher the possibility for inconsistencies in testimony. The quality of the expert witness testimony is key, not quantity.