Expert Witness Standards Reform: S. 83 (2005)
In an action against a professional (such as physicians, medical
In an action against a professional (such as physicians, medical professionals, architects, CPAs, etc.), increased the standard for admitting expert witness testimony by defining an expert witness as one who: (1) is qualified as to the acceptable standard of conduct of the professional whose conduct is at issue; (2) is licensed by an appropriate regulatory agency; (3) is board certified; and (4) has actual professional knowledge based on active practice for at least three to five years, has taught for at least half of his professional time for at least three to five years, or any combination thereof for at least three to five years. In such actions against a professional, the plaintiff must file an affidavit of an expert witness which specifies at least one negligent act or omission and the factual bases for each claim, unless the basis of the claim does not require specialized knowledge or experience to evaluate the conduct of the defendant. Provided that in any other civil action, expert witness is defined as one who has scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge which may assist the trier of fact in understanding evidence and determining a fact or issue in the case.
ATRA’s statement on passage of Amendment 1 to Illinois House Bill 3360
ATRA’s statement on Amendment 1 to Illinois House Bill 3360
ATRA President Tiger Joyce released the following statement in response to the unprecedented attack on the U.S. Capitol building on January 6:
ATRA voices its disappointment as Congress fails to include liability protections in its latest COVID-19 relief package.
ATRA President Tiger Joyce writes in this op-ed about a growing trend of state courts bucking SCOTUS precedent when it comes to personal jurisdiction.
Activism in AG’s office, Supreme Court’s acceptance of lawsuit funding and loose venue rules to blame