An expert witness prices himself out of a trial

Shoot, and I thought the ATI Uber Edition whatever-model-number Crossfire graphics card(s) was expensive…and I also went into the wrong brain specialty. Sheesh.

“The commission usually pays $200 per hour for testimony, $125 per hour for out-of-court services and $75 per hour for travel time and the time doctors spend waiting to testify in court or to give a deposition.”
These rates are unreasonable. It should be a minimum of $250/hr for testimony, $150/hr for out-of-court services and $100/hr travel and waiting time.
$10,000 a day does seem a bit excessive, though.

OMG! We are dying! We are being killed! We are being forced to abandon patients! Give us more money!

Big frickin deal. Find someone else then if they don’t want to pay. I think I will charge the same. It’s a free country.

A “free country?” Far be it from me to let reality intrude into your ideal fantasy. For those whoring with the ATLA in this regard. There is only one word to summarize any whining heard from your ilk about the rapacious trial attorneys, the legal system, etc. That word is hypocrite.

Hmmmmm… it is interesting how the lawyers on this thread think that it okay to pay doctors for their time when it comes to getting their money, but it is not okay for drug companies to pay physicians for their time. I would think that 10,000 dollars a day would give more incentive to be dishonest than a free lunch worth 5 dollars once every two weeks. Maybe, physicians shouldn’t be allowed to accept money from lawyers in order to testify. They should just have to voluntarily testify. That right there could stop the medical malpractice problem.

Part of the problem with the system is the one synapse judges that refuse to subject clinical “causation” testimony to the standards of either Kelley-Frye or Daubert (your jurisdiction may vary). Under the latter, the “error rate” prong when it comes on relying to on involved litigants who claim no prior history and claim the onset of subjective symptoms coincidentally with the event underlying the litigation – both of which the provider has zero ability to independently evaluate would result in such testimony being thrown out the window.

If he is testifying against them, presumably he already believes the defendant was negligent.

And innocent until proven guilty is a criminal concept. But you knew that.

“I don’t think the tort system is just so I don’t really “believe” in doing it–it doesn’t further the values I chose to serve. “

Determining if people have been damaged as a result of other’s negligence and helping them recover for the damages from that negligence isn’t a value you choose to serve?

I would think helping people in that situation is a pretty good value. Particularly since it is your profession who put the expert witness requirement in.

Why, that’s 54% more than the physician’s insurer was offering, then.

What would you charge for that service Donna?