“He was trying to baffle or B.S. the lawyers with big words.  But the defense attorney knew what he was doing.”  (Occupational Medicine Expert in Product Liability Case)

“... he stared at us like he could see through us.  I know he made everyone nervous.”  (Economist in Antitrust Case)

“He had a very annoying habit: when he thought he had scored a point for the plaintiffs, he would look over at the defense attorneys and kind of smirk as if he had something against one of them, and he was trying to “one up” them.  It was very unprofessional and really undermined what he was saying.”  (Industrial Hygienist in Product Liability Case)

"He argued his figures, but he was kind of stuck on those figures.  He read out of a book to explain his figures.  How are we supposed to picture those figures if he’s spitting them out of his mouth? …He needed a diagram to show us so we could visualize rather than trying to figure it out in our heads.  He wasn’t helpful."  (Accountant in Wrongful Termination Case)

“I believed Dr. X’s testimony, but after I heard the other witnesses, I couldn’t accept his testimony. Later on, it became obvious that he was more an administrator than a hands-on surgeon and that his definition of standard of care was based on his administrative perspective. (Neurosurgeon in Medical Malpractice Case)

“She was one of the most experienced in the area.  She has first-hand knowledge in setting up bone marrow units.  She is very, very knowledgeable in knowing and in doing high dose chemotherapy.” (Oncologist in Insurance Coverage Case)

“Dr. X was not there for the plaintiff or the defense.  He was very fair, one of the few that was.  He gave his professional opinions and didn’t argue or shuffle through his notes.”  (Occupational Medicine Expert in Product Liability Case)

“He was very clear and understandable and was not condescending. I believed everything he said. And when they told us how much he made for testifying, it didn’t bother me. I wasn’t surprised.”

“He was straightforward in a scientific manner. He looked at the cultures he did and explained his conclusions. He was scientifically objective. He at least left the impression that he was open to questioning his results. He didn’t have the ‘doctor is a god’ type persona. (Pathologist in Product Liability Case)

Don't talk down to jurors or appear arrogant.

Explain complex concepts clearly, in images and language that lay people can understand.

Don't obviously be an advocate for your side; be a teacher and an advocate for the truth.

Be an expert in practicing your profession, not just testifying.

Don't argue with the attorneys.

Earn your money! Jurors don't mind that experts get paid large sums if the expert's testimony justifies the expense. People know that the best get paid for their efforts.