Communicating Forensic Opinions, Expert Testimony and Report Writing

Question 1

Jenkins v. U.S. (1961) *

Answer 1

Psychologists DO have specialized knowledge relevant to the diagnosis of insanity and should be permitted to testify on such matters

Question 2

Bruce v. Byrne-Stevens & Associates Engineers (1989)

Answer 2

SCOTUS held that the fact that the
engineer had been retained and compensated by the plaintiffs, rather than appointed by the court, did
not deprive him of witness immunity.

The court also held that witness immunity applied not only to the engineer’s testimony but also to any of the engineer’s pretrial actions that supported his testimony

Question 3

Budwin v. APA (1994)

Answer 3

APA can censure its members. He was immune from malpractice litigation, but not entitled to immunity from investigation into an ethics violation.

Question 4

Deatherage v. Examining Board of Psychology (Wash. 1997)

Answer 4

Disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against a licensed professional under the Uniform Disciplinary Act (RCW 18.130) based upon unprofessional conduct as an expert witness in judicial proceedings. Absolute witness immunity for a licensed professional’s expert testimony given in a judicial proceeding is not a defense in a state licensing board’s disciplinary proceeding against the professional.

Question 5

Murphy v. A. A. Mathews (Mo. 1992)

Answer 5

The Supreme Court of Missouri permitted a cause of action against a party’s own expert witness for negligently performing litigation support services — as an exception to the general rule of witness immunity. The court held that because the expert agreed to provide professional services to a party for a fee, it assumed the duty of care of a skillful professional.