Introduction:

CPA, Calvin P. Anderson has a great deal of experience in services related to tax and financial statements as well as business consulting. In this case, He provided, for the first time, litigation services for a new attorney client. Those services require Calvin to be an Expert witness in the court.

The following are a list of mistakes that the expert witness (Calvin) made in his engagement:

* Insufficient preparation and experience in litigation support. (He have no experience in this field and He only attended a 3 day seminar before marketing for those services) * Calvin should have mentioned to the lawyer that he testified only once before in a divorce case and it was on tax services that he provided. * Calvin signed the engagement letter without carefully reviewing it. (Must importantly he should have reviewed it for any restrictions imposed on use and disclosure of his work, any conflict of interest exist with the attorney, fees and payment arrangements) * If Calvin has reviewed the engagement letter, he would have avoided the issue of independency related to fees, because the fees were tied to the trial results. * Lack of communication with his client, Lack of information (such as Plaintiff was disabled), inadequate examination of the issues presented, and wrong assumptions used for calculating potential damages. (An expert should review and rely on industry practices and professional standards instead of relying on opinion of single individuals. Also, an expert should establish a proper communication with his client in order to enable him to develop a clearer picture of the assumptions used) * He shouldn’t lie about the expert report. (An expert should discuss the report with attorney and list issues that should be addressed) * Calvin does not know the report requirements and failed to include in the report: * Why and how techniques being used apply to the specific matter of the case. * Did not provide information and sources used to form his opinion. * Did not include a CV * The attorney has prepared a ghost report, and Calvin signed it without even reviewing it. * He should have prepared himself better for testifying in court by reviewing facts to better explain his opinion and conclusion. * An expert should put on his mind, at all time, that all paperwork might be presented in court including side notes such as the one related to the conversation between Calvin and the attorney. (This specific note would implies to the jury that the report is results-oriented)
Conclusion:

A proper training for litigation services area would include the knowledge of what is expected from an expert witness such as professional standards and expert report structure. Calvin could have done the litigation service without struggling if he had a proper training instead of relying on a 3-day seminar.