By the time a reasonable compensation question reaches counsel, the expert decision is usually made quickly — and it is difficult to unmake. The wrong choice surfaces at the worst possible moments: a Daubert motion, a deposition admission, a report the witness cannot defend. These are the questions we believe retaining counsel should ask any compensation expert — including us.

1. Have you been deposed and testified — and where?

Not “have you consulted.” Deposition and trial or arbitration testimony, with venues. An expert learns what survives cross-examination by being cross-examined.

2. Who will do the analysis, and will that person sign and testify?

The Tax Court discounted a well-credentialed expert in Clary Hood partly because the testifying witness admitted a co-author did most of the work. The analyst, the signature, and the witness should be the same person.

3. What data will you rely on — and can you produce it?

Credible third-party survey data, identified by name, with the comparability adjustments explained. If the data cannot be produced and defended, it does not exist for litigation purposes.

4. Which methodologies will you apply, and why more than one?

Market comparability, composite-role (“Many Hats”) analysis, and the independent investor test answer different questions; convergence across them is what persuades. A single-method report is a single point of failure.

5. Is any part of your fee contingent on outcome?

If the answer is anything but an immediate no, the interview is over. A contingent expert is impeached before the first substantive question.

6. Have you worked both sides?

Taxpayer and government perspectives; plaintiff and defense. A one-sided record invites the hired-gun cross — and usually earns it.

7. What happens if your analysis doesn’t support our position?

The right answer: you will hear it early, before disclosure deadlines and hardened positions. An expert who has never delivered unwelcome conclusions is not being retained for an opinion.

8. What is your conflicts process?

Party names should be checked before any confidential facts move. It protects the client, the expert, and the timeline.

9. What do you need from us, and by when?

A serious expert scopes the record request and the calendar against report deadlines at the outset — FRCP 26(a)(2)(B) obligations are not compressible at the end.

Grahall answers all nine on the record — engagement mechanics, deliverables, and fee structure are on our For Attorneys page, and every matter starts with a conflicts check: party names only, nothing confidential.