Everybody has an opinion these days. Many of us surf through Reddit to read all sorts of things. Most of us will check out Amazon reviews before buying something. And, of course, there will be lots of controversial takes on things over the holidays, not just over the food (think pie) but all those highly anticipated Bowl Games. For details, read “2026-27 College Football Playoff, bowl schedule,” published by ESPN on June 3, 2026.
For those involved in pursuing justice after suffering severe harm in a catastrophic accident, it is important to know that formal expert opinions in their legal case are treated much differently under the law than our personal opinions.
And one of the biggest targets in the defense team’s strategy will be to attack the accident victim’s experts in order to discredit their findings, or even better (from their viewpoint), to get the expert booted out and excluded.
Accident Victim Experts: Liability and Damages
In any personal injury matter, the accident victim will have the burden of proving with admissible and authenticated evidence not only (1) the parties who are legally to blame for what happened (liability); but (2) to substantiate every single cent of their monetary claims (damages). These matters can be very complex, and experts will be needed to prove up both liability and damages.
Few things are more important than deciding what experts will be needed in a case, and then choosing who will be asked to provide expert opinions on behalf of the accident victim. These are decisions made by the legal advocates for the accident victim alongside their client, working together as a team.
For instance, a semi-truck crash in Indiana may need experts in liability that are astute in the trucking industry. A construction worker accident in Chicagoland may need a very different set of liability experts to show the parties liable on the construction project worksite or the road work construction zone.
Damages calculations will be much different for a college student suffering permanent harm like an amputation in an Illinois car crash, and a wrongful death suffered by an experienced lineman close to retirement, electrocuted on the job during a power outage. Life expectancies, lost earning capacity, long term medical care and rehab needs, and other variables will be very different in these two scenarios.
Each case is unique and must be given individual respect and consideration. There is something shared in all these personal injury matters, though.
For all these accident victims, they will face insurance defense teams fighting against findings of liability and damage awards through longstanding strategies they have honed over the years. Many times, the success of a case will depend upon successfully anticipating and thwarting the defense attack on the victim’s experts.
For more, see: Liability in Chicago Warehouse Worker Injury Claims: Accident Expert Investigations; and Construction Accident Expert Witnesses in Work Accident Claims.
Legal Standards for Expert Witnesses in a Personal Injury Case
In both Illinois and Indiana, there are specific procedural requirements and legal standards that separate the expert witness from others in the case. This is called “qualifying the expert,” and the hurdles that the expert must jump are different in the state laws of Illinois and Indiana as well as whenever a case proceeds in federal court.
Each jurisdiction has legal tests for these experts, designed to confirm the scientific reliability of their opinion testimony. These tests can be found in: Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (“Testimony by Expert Witnesses”); Illinois Rule of Evidence 702 (“Testimony by Experts”); and Indiana Rule of Evidence 702 (“Testimony by Expert Witnesses”).
These procedural rules of evidence explain what testimony is allowed or barred in a case. However, for accident victims seeking damages against defendants who are liable for their injuries, things are different here depending upon their location.
Consider the following:
- In federal court, the “Daubert standard” is applied, based upon the U.S. Supreme Court decision inDaubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993).
- In Illinois, the “Frye standard” is used, based upon the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Frye v. United States, 54 App.D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013 (1923).
- In Indiana, a modified Daubert standard controls, explained by the Indiana Supreme Court in Sears Roebuck & Co. v. Manuilov, 742 NE2d 453 (2001) and Malinski v. State, 794 NE2d 1071 (Ind. 2003).
The gatekeeper function of these standards varies, with the federal Daubert standard being the most stringent where the expert’s science must be independently verified.
Defense Tactics to Target Accident Victim’s Expert Evidence
Long before any jury pool arrives in a courtroom, the defense attorneys will be focusing upon the plaintiff’s case and especially upon ways they can block the accident victim’s experts from providing support to the victim’s claims. It is an offensive move, commonplace in accident matters with large damage amounts and complex liability (think more than one party caused the event).
These are not surprises to the experienced personal injury attorney who is advocating for the victim and their loved ones. The victim and their legal team will be ready to counter defense challenges at any “Daubert Hearing” or “Defense Motion in Limine” with protections against arguments that may include:
1. Attacking the methods used by the plaintiff’s expert.
Defense arguments may claim that the medical experts or various scientific experts presenting opinions on behalf of the accident victim have relied upon unscientific bases or cornerstones. The plaintiff’s team must stand ready to confirm the scientific reliability of their expert’s analysis.
2. Attacking the expert’s qualifications to provide the specific opinion.
The defense lawyer may compare the expert’s education and expertise with the opinions presented, and suggest that there is a gap between them so wide that the opinion amounts to mere speculation.
3. Attacking the fee.
Oftentimes, the experts in these matters are among the top in their respective professions, and their fees will reflect their achievements and professional status. For defense attorneys, the fee charged by this formidable expert (or firm) may be fodder for an argument that they are biased and giving a favorable opinion to the accident victim just because they charge a substantial fee for their services.
Defending Plaintiff Experts and Defeating Defense Challenges to Expert Witness Testimony
After any severe accident in Illinois or Indiana, whether a car accident, semi-truck crash, or injury on-the-job suffered by a worker on the jobsite, the immediate concern must be for that accident victim to get medical care and treatment and deal with the immediate consequences for both their lives and those of their loved ones. Catastrophic personal injuries not only harm the victim, but those that love them.
Soon, there will come a time when the injured victim and their loved ones decide they must find justice when others (individuals and companies) have been the reason for the accident and its aftermath.
Sadly, under our laws, the wrongdoers do not have to come forward and admit their responsibility. In fact, they can legally deny everything and force the victim to move forward and prove up their case.
Part of this process includes sophisticated insurance carriers and defense lawyers with their investigators and researchers working hard to find every possible argument against being found legally liable for the accident as well as trying to minimize every dollar asserted by the victim as damages caused by the incident.
Victims need to know that not only will they need experts to provide analysis and opinions to help them find justice, but that the defense team will have all sorts of tactics, many of which the accident victim and their loved ones may find insulting or frustrating or even a whole new type of hurt to suffer in their path to recovery.
Having an experienced and zealous attorney representing their interests against these challenges can be invaluable in many ways. And all accident victims need to be prepared for these attacks. They are routine, and part of the case preparation will be anticipating these challenges well in advance of the defense making them.
For more, read:
- Accident Reconstruction Experts and Injury Claims
- Indiana Truck Crash Victims and Representation by Board-Certified Attorneys in Truck Accident Law
- Common Defense Arguments Against Damage Claims Used to Try and Minimize Payout
- Why Truck Accident Cases Often Involve Multiple Insurance Companies
- Why a Lawyer who is a Trial Attorney Is Important for Accident Victims in Personal Injury Cases.
Expert opinion and expert witness testimony on both liability and damages is key to any personal injury case and defense strategies to exclude or discredit them must be expected. This is particularly true in claims for large damage amounts involving a number of defendants. Please be careful out there!
