Not Every Case Needs an Expert Report

One thing I have learned since beginning this work is that not every attorney needs—or wants—a formal expert report.

Sometimes counsel simply wants an experienced second set of eyes on the case. They want someone to review the reports and video, explain what the officer was trained to do, and identify anything that deserves closer attention.

That can be the entire engagement.

I can review the available discovery and then discuss my observations privately with counsel by telephone or video conference. There is no automatic requirement for a written report, expert disclosure, or testimony.

This type of consultation can help an attorney evaluate the case, prepare for negotiations, develop cross-examination, or decide whether additional expert involvement would be worthwhile. It also makes this service practical for attorneys outside New England who want technical assistance but do not necessarily need me to appear in court.

If the case would benefit from something more formal, written expert findings can be added. If testimony later becomes necessary, that can be discussed separately based on the case, jurisdiction, deadlines, and anticipated scope of testimony.

I prefer this approach because it allows the needs of the case to determine the scope of my involvement. Counsel can begin with a straightforward review and consultation without committing to services the case may not require.

In short, the options are:

• Case review and private verbal consultation
• Written expert findings when appropriate
• Expert testimony when necessary

The first step is simply a conversation about the case, the available evidence, and what counsel is hoping to accomplish.