Category: Expert Witness

AccountingComputer ForensicsExpert WitnessExpert Witness TestimonyForensic Accounting

Paul Manafort Indicted: What expert witnesses can we expect to see from defense and prosecution?

Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the US Presidential Election has resulted in the indictment of Paul Manafort and one of his business associates, Rick Gates. It has been reported that a third individual, George Papadopolous, has pleaded guilty for making false statements to the FBI.

None of this is particularly surprising. On Friday we learned the first indictments would be handed down as early as today, and that is exactly what happened. As of this writing, Paul Manafort has turned himself into the FBI’s Washington Field Office.

ABC News reported the list of charges against Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates. The 12 counts include: “conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, serving as an unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading Foreign Agents Registration Act statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.”

We are not writing to take any political side and it should be noted that an indictment does not mean the defendants are guilty of the charges. In fact, they are innocent until proven guilty. Rather, we wanted to discuss the expertise which may come into play in this matter.

What types of expert witnesses can you expect to see?

Forensic Accountants:

Based on the counts enumerated above, it appears the FBI has followed the money. As such, we expect the forthcoming prosecution will hinge on financial transactions and accounting related issues. As stated above, Manafort and Gates were charged with seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts in addition to conspiracy to launder money. If money is flowing in and out of multiple bank accounts forensic accountants are going to be needed to analyze the transactions and explain those transactions to the trier of fact.

Money Laundering / Anti-Money Laundering Experts:

Are you surprised to hear this type of expertise exists? Money laundering experts may have a background in forensic accounting, financial fraud, banking, and banking compliance. Again, there was a charge of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts. Failure to report these accounts might be a compliance issue. The prosecution could argue such a failure was purposeful and intended to evade reporting. Whereas, the defense may contend failure to report was accidental or negligent. We expect to see both sides presenting expert evidence on financial transactions and reporting.

Computer/ Digital Forensics:

Nothing in the counts of the indictment specify a digital forensics expert will be necessary. We are assuming that many of the financial transactions were done electronically and therefore attributing the transactions to the defendants may require electronic discovery and other digital forensic investigation / analysis.

This list should not be viewed as exhaustive. Looking at the counts in the indictment, it appears the upcoming case will be heavily litigated on financial matters. Going forward, we will look for news items related to forensic accounting and inform our readers as we know more.

Expert WitnessLivestreamingMarketingSocial Media

Social Media Marketing World 2016 – Lessons Learned for Expert Witnesses

SMMW16Held at the San Diego, California Convention Center on April 17, 18 and 19, 2016, the Social Media Marketing World 2016 (SMMW16) was well-received with over 3,000 participants from around the world. Networking was the name of the game, with recognized brands from Airbus, Allergan, and Amazon to Verizon, Walmart, and World Vision. Platform representatives from Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Twitter, and many others were front and center imparting valuable social media marketing tactics.

There were a couple of major takeaways from this year’s event. Several things you need to know in order to better promote your expert witness services:

  • You Need To Be On Social Media:

If you are not yet active on social media you are losing precious brand awareness, engagement, and community building opportunities. At a time when consumers and clients are more informed than ever before, you need to have a social presence so your customers can “know, like, and trust you.” Attorneys cannot get to know the real, authentic version of you if you are absent from these platforms.

It is not necessary to be present on every available social media platform. Having a strategy is important. If you are looking to target attorneys, it is important to know how to find them and how to get their attention. We have services to assist you in building your presence on the correct social platforms.The priority is building relationships within your community. If you are regularly creating content and posting it to social media platforms without a community, you may find your content is not being read, watched, shared, or cared about. If you build those relationships and others care about you individually, they will share your content. It was great to see several of those in our live-streaming community in attendance at the #SMMW16, including:

  • Build An Online Community

A community on social media is not terribly different than an offline community. There are leaders, managers, and community members. Usually there is an interconnecting of these individuals for some shared purpose (or shared interest). For example, Experts.com is active in the live video / live-streaming community. There are many active Members in this community and the one thing we all have in common is we participate in creating live video. Although our businesses may be different, we still support others in the live streaming community by sharing their content.

Mitch-and-Jeff

Mitch Jackson, Esq. and Jeff Weinstein, Esq.

The priority is building relationships within your community. If you are regularly creating content and posting it to social media platforms without a community, you may find your content is not being read, watched, shared, or cared about. If you build those relationships and others care about you individually, they will share your content.

Nick and Jeff Weinstein

Ivan Raiklin, Esq. and Nick Rishwain

It was great to see several of those in our live-streaming community in attendance at the #SMMW16. Just a few with whom we were able to spend significant time include:

  • Live Video is the Future of Marketing

Here are just a few facts that were shared by Mike Stelzner, CEO of the Social Media Examiner (host of the conference).

  • 73% of marketers use video in 2016
  • Only 14% of marketers are using Live Video
  • In May of 2015, there were 2 billion videos viewed daily
  • In February of 2016, there were 8 billion videos viewed daily

The following platforms have bet big on live video (a.k.a. live streaming, social video): Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat, Blab. Each of these companies has a major live-stream component or is entirely live video as a product/tool. Facebook now gives priority to video content in its news feed. Other content will fall below live video in your news feed.

Live video allows you to increase the” know, like, and trust” factor better than anything else, according to social selling strategist, Kim Garst.

Our friend, Mitch Jackson, Esq., has said he wants to “see and hear the expert” before hiring him or her as an expert witness. Seeing and hearing an expert witness provides endless value to attorneys as they get an idea of how you sound and perform. Live video allows you to do this authentically.

As live video is the future of marketing, we highly recommend getting comfortable with live streaming sooner rather than later. Join Us to become a pioneer in the live video community. Improve your visibility, professionalism, and authenticity with live video marketing. If you do not know how to begin, reach out to us at info@experts.com.

Nick Rishwain, JD.
Vice President of Client Relations, Experts.com.

Expert WitnessExpert Witness TestimonyForensic DNA

Suzanna Ryan – Forensic DNA Expert Interview

In this one hour interview offered by Experts.com and moderated by Nick Rishwain, Forensic DNA Expert, Suzanna Ryan, expounds upon her experience and expertise.  Through targeted questions and answers, viewers get a better understanding of what services a Forensic DNA Expert Witness can offer to attorneys. Ms. Ryan also explains the circumstances under which she is retained as a consultant, unrelated to litigation.

Suzanna Ryan, MS, D-ABC, is a former forensic DNA analyst and forensic DNA Technical leader with 15 years of experience in the field of Forensic Serology and DNA Analysis. She has had the opportunity to work for both public and private DNA laboratories and has testified numerous time for both the prosecution and the defense.

Ms. Ryan has been accepted as an expert witness in forensic serology and DNA analysis over 60 times in her career in state superior courts, state supreme court, federal court, and military court, and has been deposed as an expert witness in both criminal and civil trials over 20 times.

View Suzanna Ryan’s Profiles on Experts.com

AdvertisingConsultantsExpert WitnessLawyersLivestreaming

Expert Witnesses Embrace Digital Media Platforms – Interview with Attorney Mitch Jackson

On October 14, 2015, Experts.com interviewed Expert Witness and 2013 California Lawyer of the Year, Mitch Jackson, on the benefits of Expert Witnesses embracing digital media to promote their services. To watch the interview, click the link below.

Mitch Jackson was admitted to the California Bar in 1986 and immediately opened up his own practice representing victims of personal injury and wrongful death. In 2009, Mr. Jackson was named Orange County “Trial Lawyer of the Year,” by the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association. In 2013, he received the California Lawyer Attorneys of the Year (CLAY) Award for litigation. According to California Lawyer Magazine, the CLAY Award recognizes attorneys who have changed the law, substantially influenced public policy or the profession, or achieved a remarkable victory for a client or for the public and have made a profound impact on the law. Mr. Jackson is also an expert witness in legal malpractice matters.

Mr. Jackson is an active social media influencer with a strong presence on Twitter, Facebook, Periscope, Blab, Instagram, among others. In addition to his legal practice, Mitch Jackson maintains several websites promoting: livestreaming, communication, Rotary service, and, most importantly, “Being Human.” To learn more about Mitch Jackson, his practice, and his social influence, visit the following sites:

http://jacksonandwilson.com/
http://streaminglawyer.com
http://human.social/

Experts.com was established to allow professionals a platform to showcase their areas of Expertise. Since 1994, we have been providing millions of users worldwide with access to specialized knowledge. We believe our members should have control over monetizing their specialized knowledge and expertise. In this day in age of high technology, there is no need for a broker or middle man to mark up fees or market your expertise. Put your best foot forward with Experts.com.

Accident Investigation & ReconstructionExpert WitnessForensic Accident InvestigationPublic TransportationTransportation

ADA Compliance: Bus & Motorcoach Liability

A recent article by Member, Ned Einstein, President of Transportation Alternatives, a passenger transportation and automotive consortium engaged in consulting and forensic accident investigation, touches upon the safety and liability of buses and motorcoaches transporting passengers in wheelchairs. Mr. Einstein effectively communicates the legalities involved with wheelchair securement and ADA compliance. Click the link to read the full article:

Ned Einsten“Buses and Motorcoaches: Safety v. Liability” 

Ned Einstein has been qualified as an Expert Witness in accident analysis, testimony, and mediation in vehicle and pedestrian accidents involving transit, paratransit, schoolbus, motorcoach, special education, non-emergency medical transport, taxi, shuttle, and child / elderly transport systems and services.

View Ned Einstein’s Profiles on Experts.com.

Expert WitnessExpert Witness Testimony

Expert Witness Credibility Can Make or Break a Case

In the forefront of legal news today is the Glossip v. Gross death penalty challenge / lethal injection case before the Supreme Court. Set for oral argument today, the Justices must determine if Oklahoma’s use of the common surgical sedative midazolam fails to make prisoners unconscious during lethal injections, violating the Eighth Amendment’s protection against “cruel and unusual punishment.”

According to ProPublica, the case took a turn when Oklahoma’s pivotal witness, Dr. Roswell Lee Evans, testified in trial that inmates “would not sense the pain” of an execution after receiving a high dose of midazolam. That, in and of itself, is not enough to turn heads but legal and medical professionals took note when Dr. Evans, a board certified psychiatric pharmacist and the dean of the Harrison School of Pharmacy at Auburn University in Alabama, testified that he has never used midazolam on a patient, nor has he ever personally induced anesthesia.

To make matters worse, 150 pages of his 300 page expert report were printouts from the consumer website Drugs.com, whose disclaimer reads, “not intended for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.” Furthermore, pundits were grumbling at the fact that Dr. Evans had not published a paper related to his pharmacology research since 1996.

Last month, a brief was filed by 16 independent professors of pharmacology disputing Dr. Evans’ claim. The professors, according to Probublica, contended that, “It is widely recognized in the scientific and medical community that midazolam alone cannot be used to maintain adequate anesthesia…”

Caution SignCaution all Expert Witnesses! Credibility is Everything.

Once general competency is satisfied, an Expert Witness’ knowledge of the subject matter affects the weight and credibility of his testimony. Since a general rule of evidence is that a witness may only testify to what they have personally observed or encountered through their five senses, this “Sunday Pundit” is concerned for the good doctor. His lack of experience with the midazolam, his unreliable sources, and his lack of peer support do not bode well for him or the state of Oklahoma.

Ponder the The Daubert standard  for evaluating the reliability and relevance for “good science” and make your own judgment:
1) whether the scientific theory can be (and has been) tested;
2) whether the scientific theory has been subjected to peer review and publication;
3) the known or potential rate of error of the scientific technique; and
4) whether the theory has received “general acceptance” in the scientific community.

We are interested in your comments. Please feel free to share.

Expert WitnessSearch Engine OptimizationSEO

Expert Witness Marketing – The Importance of Publications

Marketing in the Expert Witness arena should not be a stagnant process. In such a competitive market, there must be more than a simple description of services. When relevant information is provided to potential clients, the chances of being retained are much higher.

The goal in any marketing strategy is exposure to the widest number of viewers. For Expert Witnesses and Consultants, publications are an extremely effective tool to help cast a wide net. Member Articles and Case Scenarios posted on Experts.com receive phenomenal exposure on search engines like Google, Yahoo, and Bing.

Informative topics with Search Engine Optimized titles can garner excellent exposure simply because there is a need for such knowledge. For instance, Member Peter Wade, who worked with the United States Postal Service for over 30 years, many of those in administrative and supervisory positions, posted an article entitled, “Certified Mail Versus Certificate of Mailing: What’s the Difference?This article has been viewed 18,013 times to date (See View Charts). Based on the numbers, there is a definite need for the dissemination of this knowledge

Experts.com Article View Source Chart

Experts.com Article View Source Chart

Experts.com Article Frequency Chart

Experts.com Article Frequency Chart

Case Studies and Case Scenarios are also an excellent alternative to writing something academic and time consuming. Case Studies allow attorneys to read fact patterns that may be similar to cases on which they are working. It also provides a sample of analytical and report writing abilities. Party names and other identifying information can be altered for confidentiality purposes. The format is a simple checklist with which attorneys are familiar:

  • Explain the facts of the case (the represented parties; how the case arose; allegations, etc.)
  • Explain the technical issues of the case
  • Give an analysis / opinion
  • Explain how the case concluded

For those involved in promoting their Expert Witness or Consulting services, publications serve as the “squeaky wheel.” The more squeak, the more oil. The numbers reflect that professional interaction with the targeted market and business community can favorably affect the amount of exposure received and, more importantly, the bottom line.

ConsultantsExpert WitnessIndustrial DesignLitigationPatent Infringement

Precision is Key to Patent Indefiniteness Challenge

Prior to June of 2014, the standard for patent review made it nearly impossible to invalidate a patent claim for “indefiniteness” or ambiguity. The  U.S. Supreme Court drastically changed that standard in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.

Nautilus brought the case before the Supreme Court based on the notion that “the patent system is best served when patent claims are precise, definite, and certain. Ambiguous and indefinite patents stifle competition and encourage unnecessary litigation.” The Supreme Court agreed saying that the ambiguity the lower court used to evaluate the patent would “leave courts and the patent bar at sea without a reliable compass.” In its unanimous decision, the Supreme Court asked the court of appeals to reevaluate whether Nautilus infringed on Biosig’s patent design based on stricter standards.

Although the Nautilus case involved a utility patent, it is suggested by Industrial Design expert, Robert John Anders, that this standard would most likely apply to design patent drawings as well. In a recent article, Mr. Anders posits that the use of break lines or brackets with “indeterminant” measurements could also lead to ambiguity, making design drawings vulnerable to patent infringement challenges.

Image

Read the full article here: Design Patent Drawing Conventions: Break Lines That May Be Fatal

Robert John Anders is a member of the Industrial Designers Society of America and the Human Factors and Ergonomic Society with more than 40 years of professional experience. Mr. Anders has been retained as an Industrial Design Expert for over 17 years.

ConsultantsExpert WitnessMedical

Sports Neurology Expert Witnesses and Concussions

Concussions have been front and center in the news for the last few years. According to the Mayo Clinic, a concussion is “a traumatic brain injury that alters the way the brain functions. Effects are usually temporary but can include headaches and problems with concentration, memory, balance and coordination. ” Technological advances in Sports Neurology have doctors concerned that such a broad definition does the public a great and very harmful disservice.

photo courtesy of premierelife.ca

Photo Courtesy of Premierelife.ca

In his article, “Plain Talk On Concussions,” Sports Neurologist, Dr. Vernon Williams, explains that the public’s understanding of concussions has been oversimplified for many years.  There are many factors to take into consideration when evaluating a patient. They can include previous brain injury, age, and even gender. Dr. Williams explains that,

“You can’t see a concussion on x-ray, CAT scan, or most MRI’s. But the lack of abnormality on those tests does not mean the brain hasn’t been injured. The injury occurs on a cellular level. When special methods are used, there is evidence of change in how the brain is working that last for days to weeks (evidence of persistent brain dysfunction) even when the injured athlete feels that they are back to 100% and the physical examination is normal.”

Players who engage in high contact sports like football  have a high risk for concussion. The problem has become so pervasive that parents and players have pressured the  NFL and the NCAA to tighten safety standards.  Innovations in helmet safety have come too late for many players. When NFL Hall of Famer, Mike Webster, was diagnosed with a progressive degenerative disease of the brain known as CTE, fellow retirees took note. Before his death, Webster suffered from amnesia, dementia, depression, and chronic pain, all symptoms of CTE.

Since then, approximately 5,000 retired players have filed suit against the NFL alleging the entity hid the dangers of concussions. Among the plaintiffs in these lawsuits are Art Monk, Tony Dorsett, Jim McMahon, Jamal Anderson, and Ray Easterling. Considering how high profile these cases have become, it is no wonder that brain injury has become a growing concern in Sports Medicine litigation.

Concussion litigation in the NFL, sports clubs, and even in school yards across the country have garnered so much attention that George Washington University’s law school has developed a course devoted solely to the legal implications of traumatic brain injuries.  Michael Kaplen, who teaches the course, is a plaintiffs’ lawyer who has worked on cases involving traumatic brain injuries for more than two decades. Kaplen believes the NFL became responsible for the safety of its players when it began studying the cause and effect of concussions over twenty years ago. (See article in The NewYorkTimes.com).

Public safety is the common thread for sports neurologists like Dr. Vernon Williams and litigators like Michael Kaplen.  With advances in medical technology, doctors have learned that the basic warning signs of a concussion which have prevailed for so many years are no longer sufficient. In light of this progress, making the NFL and other organizations accountable for the well-being of its players may be the catalyst to improved neurological health not only for athletes, but for everyone who has suffered traumatic brain injury.

______________________________________________________________________________

*Vernon B. Williams, MD specializes in Sports Concussions, Sports Neurology, and Pain Medicine. Dr. Williams is the Founding Director, Center for Sports Neurology and Pain Medicine at the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopedic Clinic in Los Angeles, CA. His clients include the Los Angeles Lakers, Los Angeles Dodgers, Los Angeles Kings, Los Angeles Sparks, among many others.  Dr. Williams’ Profiles on Experts.com.

 

 

 

 

Expert WitnessIntellectual PropertyLitigationPatent Infringement

The Tech Industry and Litigious NPEs

Patent InfringementIt comes as no surprise that the tech industry is the most litigated of 2012-2013. With companies such as Apple, Samsung, Verizon, LG, and Google vying for major shares of the market, competition can get fierce. For over a year, Samsung and Apple have been slugging it out over the copy and design of the iPhone’s software features. These, however, are operating companies with products and services to sell, both of which are vulnerable to fundamentally important legal counter-assertion defenses. Intellectual property litigation gets even more complicated and egregious when it is engendered by entities with no competitive products and services. The same defenses do not apply to to these entities. Even with new and pending patent reform laws in place, high tech litigation is overwhelming our court system and affecting the bottom lines of many high tech companies in industries such as electronics, communications, semiconductors, and software.

The most notable combatants in the IT litigation arena are the Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs), derogatorily known as “patent trolls.” These companies base their revenue stream solely on collecting, licensing, and enforcing patents, litigating whenever there is a threat to their patent’s market share, whether real or dubious. Although under criticism from some, James Bessen and Michael Meurer from Boston University released a highly publicized study estimating that the direct cost of NPE patent assertions is “substantial, totaling about $29 billion in accrued costs in 2011.” Although this includes patent infringement awards in all industries, high tech makes up fifty percent of NPE suits filed.

Litigation brought on by NPEs, both costly and time consuming, is difficult to defend. According to PatentFreedom, a company dedicated to assessing and addressing specific NPE risks, since NPEs “do not sell products or services (other than the licensing of their patents), NPEs typically do not infringe on the patent rights contained in others’ patent portfolios. As a result, they are essentially invulnerable to the threat of counter-assertion, which is otherwise one of the most important defensive – and stabilizing – measures in patent disputes.”

The America Invents Act (AIA) passed in September of 2011, which was meant to limit the number of defendants an NPE can join in a suit, has not curbed the amount of patent infringement litigation occurring today. The major tenet of AIA is a shift from “first to invent” to “first to file.” As such, NPEs can no longer gather all possible defendants in an effort to maximize awards. With good intentions, Congress set out to decrease the “deep pocket” syndrome, thereby reducing the number of suits filed. Although the AIA changes the economics of litigation, it has not, in the past few years, decreased the number of cases filed by NPEs. In fact, PatentFreedom estimates that, NPE  litigation against operating companies has increased by 170 from 2012 to 2013, and this is only the halfway mark. In 2012, the number of cases filed against operating companies was 4,229. So far this year, that number has increased to 4,400.

In March of 2013, the Shield Act was passed to curb the amount of egregious lawsuits brought on by NPEs. In effect, it makes NPEs responsible for the litigation costs of failed suits. However, the Shield Act requires defendants to take the suit all the way to final judgement. Since much time and resources are required to litigate these suits, most settle well before judgement. This leaves the door wide open for opportunistic NPEs.
Considering they have the right to sue, do NPEs, by their nature, have an unfair advantage over the operating companies they are suing. Considering the state of affairs today, should Congress do more to level the playing field? Only time will tell how this battle plays out.