Want to know why the best experts rarely “win” a case—and why they still matter so much? We sit down with veteran estate and tax attorney and expert witness John Hartog to unpack the real value of expert testimony: confidence backed by facts, credibility that survives cross, and preparation that starts early enough to shape the entire strategy.

John traces his first expert assignment decades ago to what makes testimony persuasive now. We talk about the line between confidence and overconfidence, how an expert adjusts for a judge versus a jury, and why swagger reads as advocacy when a jury is listening. He explains why experts typically don’t decide outcomes—the facts do—but how a disciplined opinion can frame those facts so a fact finder sees them clearly. If you’ve ever waited until the eleventh hour to hire an expert, John spells out the hidden costs, from shaky disclosures to weakened confidence, and makes the case for bringing experts in early to guide discovery, strategy, and settlement leverage.

We go deep on credibility management: handling old articles and books that pop up on cross, distinguishing best practice from the standard of care, and staying consistent without being rigid when new facts or law emerge. John breaks down smart communication under differing discovery rules, especially in states where an expert’s entire file is discoverable. You’ll hear practical tactics—phone-first for substance, tight emails for logistics, screen sharing for drafts—and how federal versus state rules change report strategy. We also compare venues, from California courts to federal cases and even foreign jurisdictions that admit expert opinions on California law, and why local counsel should set guardrails when testifying elsewhere.

Across it all, one theme stands out: productive tension. Lawyers sharpen an expert’s opinion by challenging it; experts strengthen a case by flagging weak facts and untenable theories. That respectful friction is where durable, persuasive testimony is forged. If you work with experts—or are one—this conversation offers a clear roadmap for building opinions that hold up when it counts.

If you enjoyed the conversation, follow the show, share it with a colleague, and leave a quick review to help others find Engaging Experts.

In this episode . . .

Ever seen a brilliant expert lose a jury in five minutes? Credentials alone don’t win cases, and today, we’re unpacking why. We’ve brought together three seasoned voices to share what really matters when turning expertise into testimony that persuades:

• Erik Groothuis – Commercial Litigation Attorney and Arbitrator
• Mark McKenna – Professor at UCLA and Partner at Lex Lumina, LLP
• Kevin Hensley – Partner at Barton Gilman

From the first call to cross-examination, our panel dives into the traits that separate great experts from the rest: attention to detail, calm under pressure, and the ability to teach without talking down. You’ll hear why early involvement can save cases from brittle theories and missed evidence, plus the vetting checks these attorneys use to spot credible practitioners versus “for-hire” opinion mills.

We also tackle the messy middle: how much material to share, why oversharing beats ambushes, and the value of starting experts on a consulting basis to preserve candid feedback. The conversation compares venue demands across state, federal, arbitration, and specialized courts, with practical prep tips and mock exam strategies that build confidence. We explore tricky scenarios: when a related specialty is enough, when it falls short, and how cross-examination can expose those gaps.

One message runs through the conversation: great experts combine deep knowledge with clear communication, and great lawyers welcome early challenges to sharpen their case strategy. We wrap up with actionable advice experts can use today: be responsive, avoid surprises, align your schedule with court timelines, and think like a teacher.

If you find this episode valuable, subscribe, share it with a colleague who hires experts, and leave us a quick review telling us the one expert trait you value most.

Media standoffs don’t start in a courtroom—they start at the negotiating table where content owners and distributors wrestle over price, reach, and leverage. We invited Howard Homonoff, senior advisor in media and entertainment, longtime dealmaker, Forbes columnist, and adjunct professor—to unpack how those high-stakes negotiations evolve into legal disputes and what great expert work actually looks like when the lights come on.

Howard traces his path across both sides of the aisle, from acquiring channels for operators to defending brands at networks, and explains why that “Switzerland” perspective is gold when neutrality matters. We get specific about vetting: how attorneys assess fit and performance, how experts run conflict checks that catch hidden ties, and how a deep public record—columns, talks, interviews—can build credibility while also arming cross-examiners. He shares a simple rule for depositions that saves careers: answer the question and stop.

If you care about media law, distribution strategy, expert testimony, or arbitration, this conversation delivers practical playbooks and hard-won lessons. Enjoy the episode, share it with a colleague, and if it helped you think sharper about expert work, tap follow and leave a quick review—we read every one.

Money leaves a trail, but only a clear storyteller can make that trail persuade a jury. We sit down with forensic CPA and litigation consultant Tatevik Torossian to unpack how expert witnesses transform complex financial disputes into simple, credible narratives that hold up under fire. From early career lessons to first-chair testimony, she shares the preparation habits that matter most: reading your own depo transcript, pressure-testing schedules, and anticipating the strongest lines of attack long before cross.

Method and venue shape strategy. We break down a case where the opposing expert compared contingency-based revenue to time-and-material billings and drew the wrong conclusion—a classic apples-to-oranges error that an attentive expert can dismantle. Tatevik also contrasts Federal Rule 26 narrative reports with state court exhibit submissions, touches on family court dynamics, and shares how mediation and arbitration change the pace, cost, and outcome path. Along the way, we cover engagement timing, settlement realities, time-and-materials billing, collaborating with valuation and other specialists, and the daily coordination that keeps trial teams aligned.

If you want to improve expert witness strategy, craft stronger demonstratives, or simply make your damages story stick, this conversation delivers practical steps you can use on your next case. Subscribe, share with a colleague, and leave a review telling us your favorite tactic for making complex numbers crystal clear.

What does it take to bridge the gap between deep technical expertise and effective courtroom testimony? Dr. Kirk McDaniel, with over 40 years of experience in mining and underground spaces, pulls back the curtain on the fascinating world of expert witnessing.

The conversation reveals crucial insights for both aspiring expert witnesses and attorneys who work with them. Dr. McDaniel emphasizes the cardinal rule of expert testimony: "Know your lane and stick to it." This principle has guided his case selection, leading him to decline opportunities outside his domain of mining engineering and safety. His approach has protected him from credibility challenges while allowing him to deliver authoritative opinions in his field.

Whether you're a seasoned expert, an attorney who works with technical specialists, or simply curious about how complex technical matters translate to courtroom settings, this conversation offers a rare glimpse into the strategic thinking behind effective expert testimony. The takeaway? Expertise alone isn't enough—understanding boundaries, maintaining professional standards, and fostering clear communication ultimately determine an expert's courtroom value.

Dr. Shawn Zardouz is a double board-certified specialist in Pain Medicine and Neurology, and the only physician in Newport Beach with this distinction. He holds a B.A. in Public Health from Johns Hopkins University and earned his M.D. from Wayne State University, graduating with honors in biomedical research. His postgraduate training includes an award-winning internship at Loma Linda University Medical Center, a neurology residency at UC San Diego, and a prestigious pain medicine fellowship at UCSD—recognized as the nation’s top program. As a Qualified Medical Examiner, Dr. Zardouz is an expert in treating traumatic brain injuries, chronic pain, CRPS, whiplash, post-concussion syndrome, and various neuropathies.

In this episode:

What makes a great expert witness on the very first call? We sit down with Dr. Shawn Zardouz, a double board-certified neurologist and pain management specialist, to break down the real work behind credible testimony: vetting case fit, demanding complete records, and staying fiercely objective from start to finish. If you’ve ever wondered how an expert prepares for hours of cross-examination or translates brain science into language a jury can trust, this conversation delivers a candid, practical roadmap.

The field is moving fast, and so is the role of the expert. Dr. Zardouz explains how emerging tools like diffusion tensor imaging and potential biomarkers are shaping TBI claims, and how neuromodulation is changing pain management beyond steroid injections. We also talk about collaborating with broader trial teams—neuropsychologists, accident reconstruction experts, and vocational specialists—to build consistent, defensible opinions. Throughout, we highlight practical steps attorneys can take to set experts up for success: provide complete records early, allot time for real review, and keep communication clear and respectful.

If you care about strong expert strategy, objective opinions, and medical testimony that jurors can follow, you’ll find a wealth of actionable insight here. Subscribe for more conversations with top experts, share this episode with a colleague who handles injury or TBI cases, and leave a review to tell us what you want to hear next.

A single magazine ad nudged a young CPA out of audit rooms and into the courtroom—and the lessons since have reshaped how we think about expert testimony. We sit down with Mark Gottlieb, practice leader at MSG and one of Forbes’ top CPAs for valuations, to explore how a forensic accountant turns complex financials into stories judges and juries can trust. From the first conflict check to the last exhibit tab, Mark shows why clarity and ethics are the expert’s real edge.

We unpack the two hats experts wear—consulting and testifying—and why many engagements start under privilege before moving into the spotlight. Mark walks through his preparation process, including drafting direct and cross outlines, building question sets for opposing experts, and sequencing facts so the trier of fact can follow the thread. He explains how standards of value (fair value vs fair market value) change state by state, what that means for valuation modeling, and how courtroom technology—from 80-inch displays to tight visual timelines—can sharpen your message without overcomplicating it.

Newer experts get a candid blueprint for depositions: answer only what’s asked, respect yes/no questions, and avoid volunteering context that can be twisted later. We also dive into practical workflow—initial document requests, follow-up discipline, shared channels, and maintaining momentum across dozens of active matters. Beneath the tactics is a human throughline: mentorship. Mark credits seasoned guides for helping him build a national practice and offers pointed advice for finding your own. If you work with experts, want to become one, or simply care about persuasive, ethical testimony, this conversation delivers tools you can use on your next case.

Enjoyed this conversation? Follow the show, share it with a colleague, and leave a quick review to help more experts and attorneys find us

In this episode…

Today’s guest, Dr. Pavithra Kumar, is a principal at Advanced Analytical Consulting Group. She specializes in the application of economic and financial theory to questions arising in complex security and finance litigation. Dr. Kumar is a published author and holds a PhD in finance from MIT.

Women and minorities make up some of the most accomplished experts in their fields, yet they are often at a disadvantage when attorneys choose expert witnesses, according to Dr. Kumar. It is crucial to remain vigilant of subconscious biases and take positive steps to choose the best person for the engagement, regardless of background.

Check out the entire episode for our discussion on being proactive, litigation in crypto, and building relationships as an expert.