{"id":13964,"date":"2023-07-10T15:18:16","date_gmt":"2023-07-10T21:18:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.asbestosclaims.law\/?post_type=blog&p=13964"},"modified":"2023-07-25T12:08:10","modified_gmt":"2023-07-25T18:08:10","slug":"the-role-of-expert-witnesses-in-asbestos-cases","status":"publish","type":"blog","link":"https:\/\/www.asbestosclaims.law\/es\/asbestos-blog\/el-papel-de-los-testigos-expertos-en-casos-de-asbesto\/","title":{"rendered":"The Role of Expert Witnesses in Asbestos Cases"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In a nutshell, an expert witness has special knowledge or experience<\/a> in a particular field or discipline. Frequently, expert witnesses establish cause, or a connection between asbestos fibers and serious illness, in asbestos exposure cases. Oncologists or other such experts usually provide such testimony. Other times, experts testify that a certain place had unsafe asbestos use and handling practices. Industrial hygienists or other such experts usually provide such testimony. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/pre>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
!<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
If you believe that you were exposed to asbestos, even as a child, speak to a healthcare provider about tests and screening to help diagnose lung-scarring and screen for <\/strong>asbestos-related diseases<\/strong><\/a>.<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/pre>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Expert Witnesses and Asbestos Claims<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Court cases usually feature fact and expert witnesses. Fact witnesses testify about facts, or what they saw and heard. They aren\u2019t allowed to offer opinions or make conclusions. Expert witnesses didn\u2019t see the asbestos exposure, so they can\u2019t testify about facts. However, because of their knowledge or experience, judges allow them to offer opinions and make conclusions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When a mesothelioma lawyer<\/a> selects expert witnesses, these individuals must qualify as experts in that state. Different states have different requirements, as outlined below. But a good expert is not an egghead. A good expert easily relates complex opinions and conclusions to jurors, without lecturing to them or dumbing down the information. So, a good expert, like a good Austin mesothelioma lawyer, is often hard to find.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n    
\n        
\n            \n                \n                    \n                        
\n                            
“The overall evidence suggests there is no safe level<\/span> of asbestos exposure<\/span>.\u201d<\/h3>\n                            
Source: National Cancer Institute\n<\/a> (NIH)1<\/sup><\/p>\n                        <\/td>\n                    <\/tr>\n                <\/tbody>\n            <\/table>\n        <\/div>\n    <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n\n\n
<\/pre>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Using Experts to Prove an Asbestos Exposure Case<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Expert witnesses date back as far as ancient Rome. Midwives examined women and determined matters like virginity, virility, and pregnancy. But expert witnesses didn\u2019t testify in court until around 1800. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Probably not coincidentally, lawyers filed the first asbestos exposure injury cases<\/a> not long after that. Asbestos exposure cases aren\u2019t car crash cases that rely mostly on physical evidence and fact witnesses. Asbestos exposure cases require an additional dimension. The scientific expert provided that dimension. Once more scientific experts testified in more cases, the Supreme Court standardized the process. More on that below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n    
\n        
\n            \n                \n                    \n                        
\n                            
\u201cSome asbestos fibers may bypass\u2026your body\u2019s natural defenses\u2026and lodge deep within your lungs. Those fibers can remain in place for a very long time and may never be removed.\u201d<\/h3>\n                            
Source: American Lung Association\n<\/a><\/p>\n                        <\/td>\n                    <\/tr>\n                <\/tbody>\n            <\/table>\n        <\/div>\n    <\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
The Asbestos Industry\u2019s Failure to Warn and Asbestos Claims<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Today, as mentioned above, expert witnesses help build the two biggest pillars in a failure to warn<\/a> asbestos exposure case: duty, or the industry standard, and cause.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the restaurant industry, the standard of care requires employees to wash their hands frequently. If employees don\u2019t do so, and someone gets sick, the restaurant might be negligent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Likewise, asbestos is so dangerous that companies must use certain protective procedures when their workers come into contact with this mineral. These standards vary according to risk of exposure, asbestos volume, facility size, and some other factors. That\u2019s why an Austin mesothelioma lawyer needs an expert to establish the standard of care.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
With asbestos claims, proving causation often involves an expert witness testifying.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Cause is a proven asbestos\/illness connection. Statistical records aren\u2019t convincing proof in court. Someone, preferably a highly-qualified expert, must take the stand and lay out the connection. This testimony must be strong enough to withstand withering cross-examination from defense lawyers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Additionally, all expert testimony must be strong enough to counter defense experts. These individuals usually testify that the standard of care is lower and the asbestos exposure\/injury connection is mostly speculative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When all is said and done in a failure to warn case, a victim\/plaintiff must establish negligence, or a lack of care, by a preponderance of the evidence<\/a>, or more likely than not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n    
\n        
\n            \n                \n                    \n                        
\n                            
\u201cGenerally, those who develop asbestos-related diseases show no signs of illness for a long time after exposure.\u201d<\/h3>\n                            
Source: National Cancer Institute\n<\/a> (NIH)2<\/sup><\/p>\n                        <\/td>\n                    <\/tr>\n                <\/tbody>\n            <\/table>\n        <\/div>\n    <\/div>\n<\/section>\n\n\n\n
<\/pre>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Expert Witness Qualifications<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
However, we\u2019re getting ahead of ourselves. Before expert witnesses testify, they must meet that state\u2019s minimum legal qualifications. Most states use the Frye or Daubert standard. A few others use a combination of the two.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Frye Standard for expert witness testimony<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
For many years, everyone used the standard in the 1923 Supreme Court decision Frye vs. United States. Experts may testify if their methods are generally acceptable in the scientific community. This low standard usually only excludes pseudo-scientists, conspiracy theorists, and Professor Frink<\/a> types. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Then, jurors decide if that expert\u2019s testimony is credible. So, even if the expert\u2019s conclusions are shaky, the judge usually lets the expert testify, allowing jurors to decide the matter for themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Daubert Standard for expert witness testimony<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Another Supreme Court decision, 1993\u2019s Daubert vs. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, raised the bar. General acceptance isn\u2019t enough. The expert\u2019s testimony must have a reliable foundation and must closely conform to the scientific method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Additionally, under Daubert, the judge, not the jury, determines an expert\u2019s credibility. If the expert doesn\u2019t pass muster, the jury never hears the expert\u2019s testimony.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Both methods have their pros and cons. Overall, Frye may open the door a little too much, and Daubert may close the door a little too much.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
People who worked in these industries prior the mid-1980s have a higher risk of developing <\/strong>asbestos-related diseases<\/strong><\/a>:<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Construction<\/td>Factories<\/td>Foundries<\/td>Refineries<\/td>Shipyards<\/td>Mining \/ Milling<\/td><\/tr>
Demolition<\/td>Insulation<\/td>Steelworkers<\/td>Pipe Fitting<\/td>Shipbuilding<\/td>Mechanics<\/td><\/tr>
\"Image<\/td>\"Image<\/td>\"Image<\/td><\/tr>
Roofing<\/td>Textiles<\/td>Iron workers<\/td>Boilers<\/td>Firefighting<\/td>Brake Repair<\/td><\/tr>
Flooring<\/td>Cement<\/td>Electricians<\/td>Gasket Repair<\/td>Railroad<\/td>HVAC<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Unfortunately so do their families.<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Experts During Discovery in Asbestos Claims<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
Challenges to expert witnesses usually come up during discovery. This process varies, especially in states like Louisiana, which has a very different legal system. These differences make asbestos exposure claims from hot spots like Shreveport<\/a> especially challenging. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nevertheless, here\u2019s how this process usually works, and how it usually involves expert witnesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Discovery process attempts to avoid surprises in lawsuits. Our database helps too.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Basically, the discovery process requires both plaintiffs and defendants to put all their cards face-up on the table<\/a>. These cards usually include a witness list. \u201cSurprise witnesses\u201d are a staple in courtroom dramas, but they\u2019re extremely rare in the real world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Experienced asbestos lawyers usually have professional relationships with solid expert witnesses. So, as they build their cases, they know well-credentialed and credible experts who have provided critical testimony in the past.<\/p>\n\n\n\n