Learn How to Excel and Succeed as an Expert Witness
steve
About Steve Babitsky
Steven Babitsky, Esq. is the founder of SEAK, Inc., the Expert Witness Training Company. He was a personal injury trial attorney for twenty years and is the former managing partner of the firm Kistin, Babitsky, Latimer & Beitman. Steve has helped expert witnesses and their attorneys prepare for deposition in a broad range of cases, including antitrust, patent, medical malpractice, wrongful death, computer forensics, and many others. He has trained the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Aviation Administration, and he has worked with numerous forensic and financial companies including Fortune 500 companies and has
worked with numerous experts to help them expand and grow their practices. Mr. Babitsky is the co-author of the texts How to Be an Effective Expert Witness at Deposition and Trial: The SEAK Guide to Testifying as an Expert Witness, How to Be a Successful Expert Witness: SEAK’s A–Z Guide to Expert Witnessing, How to Write an Expert Witness Report, and How to Market Your Expert Witness Practice Evidence-Based Practices. Attorney Babitsky is the co-developer and trainer for the “How to Be an Effective Expert Witness” seminar and has been the seminar leader since 1990 for the Annual National Expert Witness and Litigation Conference.
***The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information.***
The sequestration of expert witnesses falls under Oregon’s Rules of Evidence, Rule 615. OR. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40.385 (West 2017). This rule allows the court to exclude a witness from the courtroom as to not hear the testimony of other witnesses upon request of a party or on the court’s own motion. Id. The [...]
Expert witness discovery is governed by New Hampshire’s Rules of Court, Rule 35. N.H. REV. STAT. ANN. § 35 (2017). This rule allows discovery into fees and expenses if a party makes a motion and the court deems it appropriate. Id. Aside from the statute, there is no other precedence regarding whether an expert [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T10:58:38-04:00September 5th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Are Expert Witness Tax Returns and Financial Information Discoverable in New Hampshire?
The sequestration of expert witnesses falls under Oklahoma’s Rules of Evidence, § 2615. OKLA. STAT. tit. 12, § 2615 (West 2017). This rule requires the court to exclude witnesses from the courtroom as to not hear the testimony of other witnesses upon a request by the court or by the court’s own order. Id. [...]
Expert witness discovery is governed by Wyoming’s Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26. WYO. STAT. ANN. § 5-26 (West 2017). This rule requires disclosure of the compensation paid to an expert for testifying in that capacity. Id. Aside from this specific disclosure, the rule allows for discovery into any other matter that is relevant [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T10:59:15-04:00September 5th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Are Expert Witness Tax Returns and Financial Information Discoverable in Wyoming?
Expert witness discovery is governed by Nevada’s Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26. NEV. REV. STAT. ANN. § 5.26 (West 2017). This rule provides that parties can acquire discovery of experts, but it does not specifically state whether financial information is included in the information that is discoverable. Id. Case law does not add [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T10:59:51-04:00September 4th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Are Expert Witness Tax Returns and Financial Information Discoverable in Nevada?
The sequestration of expert witnesses in Ohio falls under Ohio’s Rules of Evidence, Rule 615. OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 6.615 (West 2017). This rule requires the court to exclude a witness when a party requests or the court itself orders. Id. The rule provides for four exceptions, and experts fall under the third [...]
Expert witness testimony is governed by Washington, D.C.’s Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26. D.C. CODE ANN. § 5-26 (West 2017). This rule requires disclosure of the compensation paid to the expert to testify as such. Id. Along with this requirement, parties can make discovery requests for any information that is relevant to the [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T11:00:16-04:00September 4th, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Are Expert Witness Tax Returns and Financial Information Discoverable in Washington, D.C.?
Expert witness discovery in Nebraska is governed by Nebraska’s Rules of Discovery, § 6-326. NEB. REV. STAT. ANN. § 6-326 (West 2017). This rule allows discovery into the fees and expenses paid to the expert if the party desiring said information makes a motion for the information to be discoverable. Id. The court is [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T11:00:26-04:00September 3rd, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Are Expert Witness Tax Returns and Financial Information Discoverable in Nebraska?
The sequestration of expert witnesses falls under North Dakota’s Rules of Evidence, Rule 615. N.D. CENT. CODE ANN. § 6-615 (West 2017). This rule requires the court to exclude a witness from the courtroom as to not hear testimony of other witnesses when requested by a party or through an order of its own. [...]
Expert witness discovery is governed by Vermont’s Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26. Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 5, § 26 (West 2017). This rule allows discovery relating to the amount of compensation the expert is paid to testify in that capacity. Id. The rule also notes that essentially any matter is discoverable, even if [...]
By Steve Babitsky|2023-07-06T11:00:48-04:00September 3rd, 2017|Blog, Expert Witness Laws/Procedure|Comments Off on Are Expert Witness Tax Returns and Financial Information Discoverable in Vermont?