|
08 Mar 2008 12:28:38 | Steven I. Fried
I try to stay as current as possible on developments in my
little corner of the world and it struck me recently that not
much new has been written on a subject that is so important to
the financial lives of many people. Financial litigation is
frequently complicated, expensive and usually there is a lot at
risk. After working in the Banking Industry for more than 32
years, the last 20 or so of which acting as a turnaround
specialist for “troubled” banks; I have had more than my fair
share of working with banking litigation, attorneys, depositions
and court appearances. It was, in part, that very experience
that caused me to begin consulting or testifying for attorneys
on finance related matters. Working with attorneys in recent
years when I wasn’t a party to the litigation has been a real
eye-opener. Before continuing, I have to add that the vast
majority of attorneys where I have been retained have been
exceedingly bright, talented, knowledgeable and quick studies of
what can sometimes be very complex financial transactions. The
eye-opener part; however, has been some common mistakes they
make in picking and utilizing an expert consultant or witness.
Picking The Right Expert My focus in this area is on the
background credentials of the expert. I assume that any expert
retained by a law firm will make a good appearance and speak
well enough. Today, more than at any other time, many cases are
won or lost on the testimony of the expert witness. The real
difference between an expert that will help make or break your
case is the depth and diversity of the expert’s background
within the industry involved in the litigation. I specialize in
financial institution matters yet I have seen opposing counsel
try to qualify CPA’s or mortgage brokers as their expert. While
these people may be excellent at what they do; they have no
understanding of what goes on inside a bank or finance company.
Even a line employee of the institution (particularly a large
institution) usually does not have the well-rounded experience
of the overall enterprise or the administrative background to
see and comprehend the big picture. An expert who does not have
diverse administrative background may know how things are done
because of habit, e.g. “someone told me to do it that way” or
“we’ve always done it that way.” As a result, these people will
not be convincing to a judge and jury; especially after a
rigorous cross-examination. Also, I understand that attorneys
must ask certain questions of a potential expert for the obvious
reasons; but the interpretation of the answers may be flawed. My
favorite is “How many times have you testified at trial?” While
I have handled my fair share of cases, very few have gone to
trial and all have settled in my client’s favor, usually after
submitting a report. My point here is that picking the right
expert, not necessarily the one who has gone to court the most,
can really help your case. Perhaps better questions to ask are
“How many expert reports have you written?” and “How many of
those cases resulted in a favorable settlement before trial?” No
expert can turn a case without merit into a winner; but the
right expert can highlight the strong parts of your case with
enough credibility to induce a favorable settlement. Waiting Too
Long To Hire An Expert There are three ways that waiting too
long to hire an expert hurts your cause. Probably the most
unpleasant of these reminds me of the promo line for a local
radio legal talk show --- “this is where you call me on the
telephone and I tell you that you have absolutely no case!”
Seriously though, getting an early read on a case from a
consultant/expert can save you a lot of aggravation and money if
you have no case. Perhaps more important is the second reason
which is and expert can help you considerably to frame the
issues if you do have a case. A good expert has the industry
experience to immediately spot where standards and practices
have been violated and can explain why these departures are
important for your case. They have also seen and participated in
numerous similar cases so they can translate breaches into
causes of action. You lose this very valuable assistance if an
expert is not retained before a complaint is filed. One of my
favorites is being retained after the discovery period is
closed. A good expert can tell you exactly where to look in the
organization’s files to support your position. What may not seem
important or relevant or simply not thought of can be very
revealing for your case. Conversely, there are many document
requests that may be informative; but, as a practical matter,
will never be obtained. As an example in my individual area,
regulatory examinations, though very revealing, will never be
released. Not Taking Your Expert To Depositions To someone who
knows the industry and its related hedge words, not taking your
expert to opposition depositions can be really damaging. Very
often, the subject of the deposition will say something that, to
the uninitiated, may sound logical and reasonable; but, the
answer may have been carefully phrased and/or contain industry
jargon that narrows or limits the response. An expert who is
intimately familiar with the language of the trade can suggest
questions to expose limiting language. The result of this
ability to probe carefully hedged answers can completely change
the impressions intended to be left by the opposing side and, if
a trial follows, reverse the impressions intended to be left by
the opposition on a judge and jury. Limiting The Information
Given To Your Expert Occasionally, an attorney will not give his
expert all the information he has. Sometimes the attorney will
discuss this information with their expert and both agree that
it really would not add any value for the expert to review the
information. If that is the case, then “no harm…no foul.” If
that isn’t the case, you could be headed for disaster. If a
document contains information unfavorable to your position and
you don’t show it to your expert; it’s a safe bet that the other
side will. Picture the scene where opposing counsel asks your
expert, “Mr. ……….., now that you’ve read this document; does
that change your opinion?” The major reason expert witness
testimony is invaluable can be summed up in one word,
credibility. If the expert loses credibility with a judge and/or
jury; the result can be worse than if you had no expert at all.
I was taught, early in my career, to never defend an untenable
position. Allow Sufficient Time Give the expert enough advance
notice that you will need his or her services. A well-reasoned,
logical opinion needs to take into account a multitude of
factors; some of which may not immediately come to mind. In many
of the cases I have worked on, I was surprised that simply
reflecting back on the facts caused me to remember additional
facets which solidified my opinion. In one recent case, the
attorney I was working with was surprised to learn about certain
industry customs that I had previously considered so mundane as
to not be worthy of mentioning. This is sort of a bonus for
plenty of advance warning and frequent communication. If a
report is required, I always like to read it over at least a few
times to make sure the thoughts conveyed present all the
pertinent facts in an easy to read and understand fashion. My
past experience has been that a well- reasoned and
well-organized opinion or report promotes settlement. A hurried
expert analysis is usually flawed allowing an opposing attorney
to have a field day questioning a "rush job." The
attorney-expert team is critical to the successful litigation of
complex cases. Experts must be objective; the expert's job is to
vigorously search for facts and the truth. Selecting the right
expert for your needs is no easy task, but diligent work with
experienced trial counsel in the selection and preparation
process pays invaluable dividends.
Copyright © 2005 Capital Finance. All rights reserved. No
portion of this article may be reproduced without the express
written permission of the copyright holder.
1 ,2 “My Kingdom for an Expert!”, By Michael B. Lee, Beirne,
Maynard & Parsons L.L.P.
About Author :
Mr. Fried is the owner of Capital Finance, a finance and
consulting concern, providing expert testimony, litigation
support and consulting services to the legal community. He may
be reached at http://BankingExpertWitness.com
|