How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Dimitry K., Esq. Your Own Question
Dimitry K., Esq.
Dimitry K., Esq., Attorney
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 41221
Experience:  I provide basic personal injury advice to my clients in my own practice.
18572087
Type Your Personal Injury Law Question Here...
Dimitry K., Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I am repeating part of a question I just posted because my

This answer was rated:

I am repeating part of a question I just posted because my computer froze. To recap: I am an attorney and am party to a lawsuit. I would like to speak to my psychiatrist (prior to my attorney doing so) to find out what his opinion is about X. I recognize that much of our conversation would not be privileged but am ok with that. Obviously, I'd get my attorney's ok first. More importantly, I'd like to be the one who prepares the dr. for trial - either with or without my attorney. The reasons are many but the primary one is that my attorney - who had worked on the case for over a year - quit practicing law. Someone else in the firm recently picked up the case, doesn't know it well and doesn't seemed inclined to learn it. Trial is coming up soon and I don't want a postponement. So, my question is --- what are the downside risks to prepping the expert/fact witness dr. Basically, are there good reasons for not doing this that would outweigh having an insufficiently prepared witness.
Quite frankly, the only "good" reason for you not to prep the doctor for trial is that your attorney that will be handling the trial will be ill prepared at the time of trial. As such, if you are inclined to meet with the doctor, it would be best to have your attorney present as well. In addition, if you are no longer treating with the doctor, having your attorney present can mitigate any implications about you all of a sudden going to the doctor on the eve of trial to sway him/her one way or another.
D. WINOGO ESQ., Attorney
Satisfied Customers: 4714
Experience: 10+years of experience in all types of civil litigation and hearing officer/arbitrator
D. WINOGO ESQ. and other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you

Thank you for your question. It will be a pleasure to assist you again.

There is a very significant downside from the perspective of representation. By prepping the witness yourself, you might not be likewise letting your own attorney properly prep for trial. If anything, prepping should take place jointly between you and your attorney to ensure that the parties are all on the same proverbial page. Your attorney otherwise could be less prepared and be surprised when this expert is sworn in and questioned. I can absolutely understand the belief that you yourself are the best able in getting this done (and it may well be true), but this may create a disconnect between you and your attorney. Unless you are planning on conducting direct examination, prepping may not be wise on your own.

Good luck.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.


Thank you for the sound advice. Does your opinion differ at all if what is to happen is that this dr's deposition will be taken for use at trial in advance of trial because he lives in a different state? So basically, I'd likely be the person drafting the "direct" exam questions, as I've done for other witnesses.

You are most welcome. Are you asking me or your initial professional to reply? My response was somewhat accidental, as your question appeared to not yet have a post when I ended up uploading my answer. Please advise so the right person may reply, thank you!
Customer: replied 4 years ago.


You - Dimitry. I was trying to submit all of the questions on this topic to you. Thanks.

Oh, great, thank you very much. Then next time all I ask is you post my name in your question because then I would be notified that you are seeking me out.

To respond directly, you asked:
Thank you for the sound advice. Does your opinion differ at all if what is to happen is that this dr's deposition will be taken for use at trial in advance of trial because he lives in a different state? So basically, I'd likely be the person drafting the "direct" exam questions, as I've done for other witnesses.
------
My opinion would still not differ because by far the worst thing that can happen to your case, or any case, is if you, your attorney, and the expert witness are not in synch. This is a tough position to be in, the position of 'client', but ultimately you would need to make sure that it is your attorney who is best prepped with your expert, and not you yourself. What you deem to be pertinent, relevant, and useful may not be what your attorney finds pertinent, relevant, and useful, so that may not be what he would focus on during direct. You know this as well as I do, all attorneys have their own style and if your attorney ends up going against his own style, it may end up harming your case. It may instead be wiser prepping your attorney first, who can then prep the expert.

That is just my take on this situation. Hope it helps.

Dimitry K., Esq., Attorney
Satisfied Customers: 41221
Experience: I provide basic personal injury advice to my clients in my own practice.
Dimitry K., Esq. and other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you

Related Personal Injury Law Questions