Abstract
To enjoy the excitement and financial rewards of participating in complex legal strategies, while avoiding the exposure of their own work to cross-examination, many psychiatrists and psychologists choose to serve as consultants, operating behind the scenes at what seems like a safe distance from the witness stand. In certain situations, however, rules provide for the discovery of consultants for “good cause” and under “exceptional circumstances.” This article analyzes such situations via a review of cases grouped into three categories: (1) discovery of “real” consulting experts; (2) discovery of “sheltered” experts; and (3) discovery in the event of “buyer's remorse.” Judicial reassignment of consulting and testifying roles threatens the adversary system by dissuading participation from experts leery of unplanned role assignments. Counsel is best advised to anticipate such problems and to guide consultants accordingly.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
