Crossing the expert.

I have found that some of the most dramatic courtroom battles occur during face-offs between a good expert witness and a good cross-examining lawyer. This is because personal injury lawsuits often turn on the strength of the expert's testimony and the lawyer's ability to discredit it.

Accordingly, new lawyers cannot underestimate the importance of cross-examination. If the witness can be shaken to the extent that jurors doubt the expert's credibility, success win not be far behind. View cross-examination not as a chore but as an opportunity to win in one fell swoop.

But, remember, most of these courtroom battles arc fairly evenly matched because the expert witness and the cross-examining lawyer each enjoy particular advantages. Experts have many years of education and experience and, therefore, more knowledge in certain fields of study than the average lawyer. Also, they play only one role -- testifying about a small but important part of a case.

As a lawyer who must attend to myriad details in all aspects of a case, you enjoy a few advantages, too. You know how the testimony will fit into the rest of the case. You can plan your strategy with certain objectives in mind, objectives that may not be known to the expert.

Also, your familiarity with legal procedure and evidence rules gives you a leg up. The discovery rules alone contain so many hidden advantages that trial lawyers who fad to master them will face unnecessary obstacles to victory.

Preparation is key. Proper preparation gives you a reservoir of information and confidence to call on. It allows you to think on your feet and to be adaptable.

The most useful preparation materials are prior testimony and written reports by the witnesses. All should be thoroughly analyzed, summarized, and indexed. The summaries must be accurate. Sometimes a nuance can be overlooked in a hastily done summary. Use the expert's precise language. Thus, when asking, "Isn't it true that you said `X'," the lawyer can be sure that that was the witness's exact language.

Most expert witnesses have written in their field of endeavor. Long before trial, require that they identify their articles. Then study the content closely. Frequently, witnesses will write on topics that are very different from the one on which they are testifying. Use these writings to show that a witness is not within his or her true field of expertise.

When experts, articles do focus on the field in which they are testifying, identify the inevitable contradictions with the testimony. Experts often cite as an authority an article that is critical of some phase of their own testimony.

Know the rules, regulations, and standards of the industry in which the expert testifies. This is important because experts may simply ignore one standard that is unfavorable to their position but cite others that are favorable. The well-prepared lawyer can counter this tactic.

In planning for cross-examination, set goals and don't be afraid to seek the ultimate from witnesses. For example, in a defective products case you want the witness to admit that the product is defective. This is an obvious but difficult goal to attain, yet don't neglect to set it. In the absence of an objective, the jury may find your line of questioning aimless.

Think of your cross-examination as storytelling. Jurors must be able to follow the "plot." A technically correct scientific exposition accomplishes little if jurors fail to understand it. Weave a story during cross, using key topics and transitions. Fashion a beginning, middle, and end to the line of questioning. Jurors are more likely to absorb what is said.

Keep a tight rein on expert witnesses. Don't let them use this phase of trial as a forum for expounding on the reasoning behind their opinions. The scope of cross-examination must focus sharply on your objectives.

Often the answers that appear to be an invincible shield can be made into a piercing sword. Be alert to these opportunities. Every unfavorable bit of evidence should be closely analyzed with the goal of turning it to your advantage.

Scott Baldwin, a past president of ATLA, practices law in Marshall, Texas.