Legal Responsibilities and Expert Testimony Flashcards
7 cards from real ABFM practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Legal Responsibilities and Expert Testimony flashcards as text
When a forensic expert's opinion changes between the written report and trial testimony, opposing counsel may use which technique to impeach the expert?
Answer: Cross-examining with the inconsistent prior report
Prior inconsistent statements in written reports are a classic cross-examination tool to impeach an expert's credibility and reliability.
The 'learned treatise' exception under FRE 803(18) allows an opposing party to use authoritative publications during cross-examination of an expert to:
Answer: Impeach the expert or establish facts when the expert acknowledges the work's authority
Under FRE 803(18), statements from learned treatises may be read into evidence when an expert acknowledges the publication's authority, to impeach or as substantive evidence.
A forensic medicine expert is court-appointed under FRE 706. What distinguishes this appointment from a retained expert?
Answer: Court-appointed experts serve as neutral aids to the court rather than advocates for either party
FRE 706 court-appointed experts serve as neutral aids to the trier of fact rather than as advocates for either party, which distinguishes them from retained experts.
Which federal statute imposes criminal liability on expert witnesses who knowingly make false statements in federal proceedings?
Answer: 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False Statements Act)
18 U.S.C. § 1001 criminalizes knowingly making false statements to federal authorities, and perjury statutes apply to sworn testimony in federal proceedings.
In depositions, a forensic medicine expert must answer questions about which of the following despite a retaining attorney's objection?
Answer: The factual basis and methodology underlying the expert's opinions
The factual basis, data, and methodology underlying an expert's opinions are always discoverable and must be disclosed regardless of objections.
Which scenario best illustrates 'hired gun' expert witness conduct that violates professional ethics?
Answer: Consistently tailoring opinions to favor whoever retains the expert regardless of the facts
A 'hired gun' expert abandons objectivity and tailors opinions to the retaining party's needs, which violates the expert's ethical obligation to provide honest, impartial testimony.
Under HIPAA, when a treating physician is subpoenaed to testify as a fact witness in a civil case, which statement is correct?
Answer: A valid court order or subpoena with proper patient notification can permit disclosure of protected health information
HIPAA permits disclosure of PHI in response to a court order, or a subpoena accompanied by satisfactory assurances that the patient has been notified or a protective order is in place.