| name | expert-witness-designation |
| title | Expert Witness Designation |
| description | Drafts expert witness designation documents satisfying FRCP 26(a)(2) or state equivalents. Covers qualifications, opinion summaries, methodology, compensation, and report integration. Use during discovery when disclosing retained experts to opposing counsel and the court. |
| author | CaseMark |
| author_url | https://github.com/CaseMark/skills/tree/main/skills/legal/expert-witness-designation |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| version | 0.1.0 |
| execution_mode | open |
| jurisdiction | us |
| practice | litigation |
| language | en |
| tags | ["drafting","pleading"] |
Expert Witness Designation
Drafts a procedurally compliant expert designation that positions the expert's qualifications and opinions strategically while satisfying all disclosure requirements.
Prerequisites
Gather before drafting:
- Case info — caption, case number, court, judge, designation deadline
- Operative pleadings — to map disputed issues the expert addresses
- Expert details — full name, address, phone, email, title, current CV, engagement letter, preliminary reports/findings
- Prior testimony — cases testified in during previous 4 years (FRCP 26(a)(2)(B)(v))
- Prior designations — from other matters for consistency
- Compensation — hourly rates by activity type, total paid to date
Quick Start
- Confirm governing rule (FRCP 26(a)(2) vs. state equivalent, e.g., CA CCP § 2034.260)
- Identify each discrete opinion the expert will offer
- Map every qualification to a specific case issue — no generic CV dumps
- Draft opinion summaries with Daubert/Frye compliance built in
- Attach or reference expert report per FRCP 26(a)(2)(B)
Document Structure
Front Matter
- Case caption matching court records
- Title: "[Party]'s Expert Witness Designation Pursuant to [Rule]"
- Governing rule citation
- Procedural context: timely designation, sequential/simultaneous exchange, rebuttal status
Expert Identification
- Full name, address, phone, email
- Precise subspecialty tied to case issues
- Good: "Board-certified forensic pathologist specializing in biomechanics of traumatic injury"
- Bad: "Medical expert"
- Current professional role
Qualifications Narrative
Present under FRE 702 framework:
- Education — degrees, institutions, honors, relevant fellowships/certifications
- Experience — positions relevant to disputed issues; quantify where possible ("performed over 500 of the procedure at issue")
- Credentials — licenses (jurisdiction, number, status), board certifications, professional memberships
- Publications — peer-reviewed articles on case-relevant topics, textbooks, treatises, editorial positions
- Prior testimony (4-year) — case name, court, jurisdiction, issues, depo/trial; note plaintiff vs. defendant balance; address prior Daubert exclusions proactively
