SILICOSIS Article #4
How to Write an Expert Report That Withstands Cross-Examination
By Gil Chotam & Greg Andrews | National Tile and Stone Authority (NTSA)
In litigation, an expert report is more than a formality. It's the backbone of your argument, the first impression for the court, and the first target in cross-examination.
Yet too often, reports are rushed, vague, or overly confident, and opposing counsel knows exactly how to pick them apart. Whether you're building a case or defending one, you need reports that don't just look smart, but hold up under pressure.
Here's what separates a good report from a courtroom liability.
- Anchor Every Conclusion to Something Solid
Your expert should never just say, "In my opinion..." without showing how they got there.
What to demand:
- Clear references to industry standards (ASTM, ANSI, OSHA, etc.)
- Causation claims supported by measured conditions or documented sequences
- Every opinion backed by photos, specs, or language from the materials in question
If it can't be backed up in writing, or reproduced, it doesn't belong in the report.
- Eliminate the Weakest Link Before Opposing Counsel Finds It
We often perform pre-deposition reviews for legal teams and ask:
"If you were opposing us, what would you go after in this report?"
That's where most mistakes are found:
- Unsupported assumptions
- Language that sounds speculative
- Gaps in the timeline
- Failure to mention site limitations or alternative causes
A good report doesn't pretend it knows everything, it documents what was seen, what was measured, and where margins of uncertainty lie. That honesty builds credibility.
- Stay in Your Lane
This is a huge one, and often overlooked.
If you're a tile expert, don't speculate on medical conditions.
If you're an engineer, don't weigh in on legal responsibility.
Judges notice. So do opposing lawyers.
The moment your expert drifts from their domain, medical, technical, or contractual, it raises red flags. In some cases, it may even lead to part of their testimony being thrown out.
Instead, a strong expert:
- Clearly defines their scope
- Notes what falls outside that scope
- Collaborates (not competes) with other experts on the team
- Make It Visual, and Verifiable
A solid expert report should feel like a field manual:
- Numbered photos with time stamps
- Clear diagrams or annotations
- Comparisons (before/after, standard vs. failed practice)
- Easy-to-read formatting (headings, bullet points, glossary if needed)
Remember: the court doesn't want a lecture. They want clarity.
A judge or arbitrator should be able to skim and still understand:
- What failed
- Why it failed
- What evidence shows it
- Who had the duty to prevent it
- Write for the Courtroom, Not Just the Client
This is critical: your expert isn't writing for you, they're writing for:
- A mediator with limited technical background
- A judge who reads 12 other reports that week
- A jury that will hear it read aloud
- An opposing lawyer who will highlight any weak word choice
That's why every report we produce is read with one question in mind:
"What happens when the other side reads this out loud in court?"
Does it hold up? Or does it create doubt?
Final Word: The Expert Report Is the Testimony
For many construction defect and toxic exposure cases, the expert report may be the only thing the judge or arbitrator reads from your expert. It has to do more than inform, it has to survive attack.
At NTSA, we write every report as if it's going to be Exhibit A. Because it probably will be.
If you're preparing a complex case, and you need an expert whose report won't buckle under pressure, we're ready.
PREVIOUS: SILICOSIS Article 3: The New Asbestos? Why Silicosis Lawsuits Are About to Explode
NEXT: SILICOSIS Article 5: When to Bring in the Expert – And What Happens If You Wait Too Long
