Using Medical Literature on Direct Examination to Win the Battle of the Experts

For trial lawyers dealing with medical negligence or personal injury cases, knowing how to effectively cross-examine a hostile medical expert is essential. It is also important to present your own medical expert as credible and authoritative. Using medical literature during the direct examination of a medical expert at trial can be very helpful. In today’s age, accessing medical literature through search engines and medical society websites is easier than ever. However, getting this information into evidence in court is governed by the Florida Evidence Code. In Florida, experts can rely on any information they would normally use in their work to form an opinion for trial, even if that information isn’t admissible in court. This allows experts to testify based on their expertise, but there are some limits on what they can actually talk about in court. This section of the law deals with how medical literature can be used in court. It says that if an expert recognizes a book or article as authoritative, it can be used to question the expert’s testimony. However, in Florida, medical literature is usually considered hearsay and not allowed as evidence. Additionally, experts cannot use medical literature to try to make their opinion seem more valid, and there are rules about how it can be used in court. The court ruled that using medical literature during cross-examination was not allowed in this case. This means that the defendant’s use of the medical book to support their argument was not allowed because it was seen as trying to strengthen their case unfairly. This decision has been used in other cases to prohibit the use of medical literature during direct examination as well. The Florida Evidence Code allows experts to base their opinions on evidence that may not be admissible in court. However, the code does not say when or how much an expert can talk about this evidence when testifying. Some legal experts think that the court should use a balancing test to decide if the evidence is too prejudicial to be used. This means the court should consider if the evidence is more harmful than helpful. This is similar to the rule used in federal courts. Until the Florida Supreme Court changes the rule, the courts should use this balancing test when deciding if an expert can talk about the evidence they used to form their opinion. This should stop an expert from talking about evidence if it could unfairly influence the jury. The court needs to decide if the opposing party has a fair chance to question the expert witness. They consider whether the medical literature is a key part of the expert’s analysis or just extra support. If the literature has been excluded for other reasons, it should probably be excluded from the testimony. They also think about whether the opposing party will actually question the expert about the literature. The court can allow an expert to talk about medical literature that they used in their analysis, even if it was rejected, as long as it is relevant. If the opposing party brings up the medical literature, the offering party can ask the expert about it to explain their opinion. The court can also tell the jury that the medical literature is only being used as a basis for the expert’s opinion, not as direct evidence. This type of evidence has been used in Florida courts before to show the standard of care for a medical professional. So, the expert should be allowed to talk about published standards that other doctors use to guide their care for patients. In the legal world, it’s important for medical experts to rely on trusted sources when giving their opinions. This could include medical literature or industry standards. However, it’s up to the judge to decide if this information is allowed in court and if it’s fair to both sides. It’s a fine line between using helpful information and unfairly influencing the jury. In some legal cases, certain rules apply to the use of expert testimony and how it can be used to support a witness’s credibility. It’s important for lawyers to follow these rules in court. This helps ensure that all the evidence presented is fair and accurate. Some cases have specific examples of how these rules are applied. It’s important for lawyers to understand these rules so they can use expert testimony effectively in court. These are references to court cases and legal rules about expert witnesses in Florida. They discuss when experts can testify about information they learned from other sources, and when they can’t. It also mentions some specific court cases where these rules were applied.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/using-medical-literature-on-direct-examination-to-win-the-battle-of-the-experts/