Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan co-authored “Exposing Biased Testimony On Cross” which appeared in The New York Law Journal on February 23, 2010. The article discusses the basic elements necessary to properly attack the biased witness. The factors discussed include, Cross on Friendship, Cross On The Absence Of A Subpoena, Cross on Transportation and Cross On Refusing To Speak To The Opposing Party. After each factor a sample cross examination is presented. Rhonda E. Kay assisted in the preparation of the article.
From The New York Law Journal, Thursday, July 31, 2008;
Our partner, Ben Rubinowitz, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper,” write that too often, trial lawyers use demonstrative exhibits only in the one part of the trial during which the exhibit is offered – usually direct examination. Although a strong point can be made during direct, with a good amount of planning and a little bit of creativity, that exhibit can serve to bolster your point throughout the entire trial and, more importantly, serve as your surrogate during the one part of the trial when you are not present – jury deliberations.”
Our Partner, Ben Rubinowitz, will be a Team Leader at NITA’S Trial Advocacy Program to be held at Hofstra University School of Law from August 8th to 13th. Ben has served as a Team Leader for more than 25 years. This program is an intensive Trial skills program in which NITA’S “learning by doing” method is employed. For more information click here.
In Guzman v 4030 Bronx Blvd. Assoc. L.L.C., Appellate Division, First Department, Decided on June 19, 2008 The Court held;
“While plaintiffs’ expert is qualified to render an opinion on the extent of plaintiff Tyrone Guzman’s neurological deficits and may testify that those deficits are consistent with a history of head trauma, plaintiffs have failed to identify any evidentiary basis for the opinion sought to be elicited from the expert as to which of several accidents is the proximate cause of such deficits. Thus, his testimony as to this isolated point was properly precluded. However, we conclude that the trial court erred in dismissing this action without affording plaintiffs the opportunity to retain another expert witness to establish the nature of Tyrone Guzman’s physical injury and its cause, and we remand this matter for further proceedings.”
The lower Court had precluded the plaintiff’s neuropsychologist from testifying as to causation regarding the infant plaintiff’s head injury and dismissed the plaintiff’s case. In reversing the Court held that plaintiff’s should have been granted “……a continuance pursuant to CPLR 4402 to enable them to retain a medical expert to testify concerning causation.”
Ben Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Rubinowitz, Bloom, Hershenhorn, Steigman & Mackauf and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, write that “in any personal injury case, effective cross-examination is essential to win the battle of medical experts. However, many lawyers don’t prepare their examination of the opposing expert until the night before the actual cross takes place. The well-prepared lawyer knows better – a winning cross is prepared months in advance of trial.”