Page 19 - Family Law Services

to prepare a synopsis of findings, including simplified exhibits with minimal technical language. The
CPA expert should try to avoid using technical terminology associated with accounting procedures. In-
stead, the CPA should attempt to translate testimony into commonly used terms, analogies, and exam-
ples. When the CPA is testifying to the schedules and reports he or she has produced, the goal is to
maintain an easy flow of conversation by directing simplified responses to the judge (or jury). The effec-
tiveness of the testimony is lost if the judge (or jury) cannot absorb the information because it is confus-
ing or boring.

Qualification as an Expert

The judge determines the necessity of using an expert, the competency and qualifications of the expert,
and the relevance and reliability of the methodologies used by the expert to arrive at his or her conclu-
sions.

The CPA’s education, training, certifications, and relevant experience regarding the subject matter are
examined before the CPA is permitted to testify. After the direct examination of the qualifications by an
attorney, the opposing attorney may then question the CPA’s expertise in an attempt to discredit the
CPA and prohibit his or her testimony. This process is known as voir dire. fn 2 During the qualification
of the CPA, the CPA’s curriculum vitae may be submitted to the court as an exhibit. Testimony that de-
tails the CPA expert’s education, background, credentials, and experience is presented to demonstrate
that the witness has mastered a "body of knowledge" to which the expert is testifying. Many times, the
opposing counsel will stipulate that the CPA is to be qualified beforehand in order to prevent the court
from hearing the expert’s credentials. If the court is satisfied that the CPA expert meets the legal re-
quirements of an expert, the CPA will be found qualified as an expert and allowed to present opinion
testimony.

The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) and the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) provide the basis upon which a federal trial judge disallows
opinion testimony by lay witnesses and determines whether the qualifications of the expert meets the
minimum standards to present opinion testimony.

Not all state courts follow the FRE, or, therefore, allow attorneys to use the Daubert challenge. For
those states that do, the rule relevant to CPAs who provide expert testimony is FRE Rule 702, Testimo-
ny by Experts, which states as follows:

If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand
the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill,
experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if
(1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of relia-
ble principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably
to the facts of the case. [Emphasis added.]

fn 2 Voir dire , translated from French, figuratively means "to see and speak the truth." A voir dire examination is an oath
administered to a proposed witness or juror by which he or she is sworn to speak the truth in an examination to ascertain
the competence of the witness or juror.

© 2020 Association of International Certified Professional Accountants 17