That rambling professor who goes on and on about the importance
of utilitarianism may seem no more interesting than John Stuart
Mill, but he’s got a secret: from time to time, he serves as
an expert witness in court.
Professors in a wide variety of departments ““ from
statistics to health services ““ lend their expertise as
consultants to attorneys requiring specialized testimony.
Because of demand for witnesses in both civil and criminal
cases, UCLA professors have appeared in murder cases, medical
malpractice suits and cases involving allocation of state
funds.
David Feinberg, medical director for UCLA neuropsychiatric and
behavioral health services, said court consultation is not an
uncommon practice in his department, but that most people are not
involved.
Although Feinberg said some of his colleagues have stopped
testifying in court because they don’t like it, he finds
consulting fun and worthwhile.
“I see it as part of my teaching mission,” Feinberg
said, explaining that he can improve mental health policy by
educating courts and lawyers.
Both Feinberg and the university benefit from his work, which
has included cases involving custody issues and defending people in
danger of receiving the death penalty. He gets paid $400 an hour,
some of which supplements his salary; the rest goes to helping
patients who can’t afford treatment.
Feinberg explained that lawyers, who find expert witnesses on a
deposition database or by word of mouth, prefer UCLA professors
because they “have good credentials.”
Claremont attorney Jeanne Sterba, who works on catastrophic
personal injury cases, agrees that professors serve as reliable
expert witnesses.
“The university people tend to have a nice blend of work
experience and academic credentials,” Sterba said.
“They have to do research and publish so they are considered
preeminent in their field.”
Stuart Schweitzer, a professor of health services, said there
are three main incentives that drive his desire to testify in court
cases.
While he is being paid as a consultant, he is able to learn
something and engage in community service.
“I learn more about various health policy issues (and)
this is what I teach,” Schweitzer said.
He pointed out that consultation can further a professor’s
career.
“It gets external validation of somebody’s skills
and proficiency, (which is) better than individual faculty blowing
their own horn,” Schweitzer said.
Not every professor who has been involved with litigation enjoys
the process.
Statistics department Chairman Jan de Leeuw has testified in a
handful of cases involving racial discrimination in schools, but
has given up appearing in court in favor of aiding lawyers in
analyzing data.
“There is a lot of pressure and it’s very time
consuming and it’s very high-strung,” de Leeuw said,
adding that he doesn’t like the non-academic atmosphere.
William Meecham, a professor of mechanical and aerospace
engineering, is selective in what court cases he agrees to work
on.
He once worked on a lawsuit against a police department in which
officers shot a man, allegedly mistaking a slamming door for a gun
shot.
“I felt that the people had been harmed,” Meecham
said. “I would like to help.”
Thomas Garrick, a professor of psychiatry and biobehavioral
sciences, works on a wide variety of civil cases involving
psychiatric issues.
Garrick said he usually puts in a few hours a week and is
working on cases most of the time, though he only appears in court
a few times a year.
Most of the time, Garrick, a certified forensic psychiatrist,
works as a forensic consultant, helping attorneys understand the
limitations of a case so they don’t have to go to court.
“I am not a kind of paid gladiator for the attorneys; I
give them a balanced view of the case,” Garrick said.
Garrick and other professors acknowledge that they make good
expert witnesses not only because they have good credentials, but
because they don’t have to rely on consultation as their
primary source of income.
“There are probably those out there who (are biased), but
you don’t develop a reputation as an academic and wreck it by
being a sort of hired gun,” Garrick said.
Feinberg also emphasized the benefits of not relying on
consultation for salary.
“I can speak the truth,” he said.