Expert Evidence & Records

More information does not necessarily resolve a disagreement. In a complex record, the useful next step may be to identify what is known, what is disputed, and which fact could change the decision. This collection focuses on that distinction between accumulating material and making evidence usable. It brings together public work on conflicting experts, professional judgment, and the documents that carry claims from one person to another.

Begin with the episode about experts who disagree. The related discussion of expert witness work provides another perspective on the role of professional experience. Research links address intent and document structures, but should not be treated as findings about a particular case. Public summaries cannot replace the underlying record, and an expert's title alone does not resolve a factual dispute. The questions here are about relevance, uncertainty, and the next useful inquiry. No confidential case material or private benchmark answers are included in this collection.

Key questions

• Which disputed fact could change the decision?
• Would another expert resolve the disagreement?
• What does the underlying record actually support?

Start here: Difficult Problems

• Your Experts Disagree. Don’t Hire a Third One Yet.
• A Second Career for Physicians: Expert Witness Work Without Quitting Medicine
• When Smart Executives Disagree, Find the Assumption

Original research

• Knowingly and Willfully: How Federal Healthcare Fraud Enforcement Abandoned Its Own Statutory Standard
• When Intent Disappears: How Federal Health Care Enforcement Criminalizes Administrative Conduct
• The $812 Billion Illusion: Replacing PDF with Block-Semantic Trust Architectures