390 Forensic dentistryAll four of these elements must be established in order to prevail in court.
However, in today’s litigious society, some individuals file meritless claims
against corporations in the belief that these companies will settle for an
amount less than the cost of going to trial. In many cases, this philosophy has
been successful. The unfortunate consequence of this shortsighted strategy
on the part of corporations is that their willingness to settle based on the
amount of the claim has led to a dramatic increase in the number of personal
injury claims filed. There is probably more fraud in personal injury claims
than any other part of the civil litigation process.16.3.4 Dentists as Expert Witness Defendants
An expert witness dentist can be named as a defendant in a civil suit brought
by either of the parties in a case in which he or she provided expert witness
opinions or testimony. The claim may be based on a deviation from accepted
methodology in the field of expertise, rather than on a technically incorrect
opinion itself. An expert witness has an obligation to conduct himself or herself
within certain professional guidelines. Actions outside these guidelines tend
to invite civil litigation. Professional guidelines for expert witnesses are often
not as well recognized as those relating to the clinical practice of dentistry. One
who acts as an expert witness must be aware of what is required in this regard.
Based on the possibility of civil litigation, prudence would dictate sufficiently
broad professional liability insurance coverage for these activities. In some
cases, liability insurance covering clinical practice may extend to these activi-
ties also. However, do not make such an assumption unless a written clause
in the policy or a policy rider states that forensic consulting is covered. Other
possibilities for liability coverage for forensic consulting include government
agency coverage, homeowner’s umbrella coverage, or a separate policy for
forensic consulting only. Dentists providing forensic consulting services for a
government agency may have coverage as a government agent or be afforded
qualified immunity in conjunction with official duties. Intentional miscon-
duct by the expert may void any of these coverages or protections, similar to
the rules on awarding punitive damages.16.4 Case LawNumerous specific cases concerning expert dental testimony in the field of
bitemarks were discussed in Chapter 14. The foundation case establishing
bitemarks in American jurisprudence is a 1954 Texas criminal case, Doyle v.
State,^6 wherein the court accepted the testimony of a firearms examiner who
had made plaster casts of a piece of cheese found at a crime scene that bore
several bitemarks and another plaster cast of a piece of cheese bitten by the