The structural integrity of the cornea is ascertained by examination with a slit lamp microscope.  This device is a high powered microscope that projects a beam of light formed in the shape of a slit.  A slit of light projected at an angle provides the examiner a three-dimensional cross-sectional view of the cornea and structures behind the cornea.

Foreign bodies that penetrate the cornea may penetrate only partially into the cornea.  Under these circumstances the foreign body often becomes embedded in the cornea.  The foreign body may be removed by an ophthalmologist before infection or scarring develop.  Foreign bodies that penetrate the cornea are usually more complex problems.  Small foreign bodies that penetrate the cornea may become lodged in the angle of the eye or travel beyond the front portion of the eye to effect the iris or lens.

Foreign bodies that penetrate the cornea can cause a leak of fluid from inside the eye.  When in doubt, a leak from penetrating corneal trauma can by detected by placing fluorescein dye on the surface of the eye.  Leaking of fluid from the inside of an eye through a full-thickness corneal laceration is made much more evident in the presence of the fluorescein dye.

The location of corneal trauma can be an important factor.  Injury to the peripheral cornea can heal without impacting vision.  However, injuries that damage the center of the cornea effect vision since the light rays critical for our best vision travel through the center of the cornea.  Traumatic injury to the cornea can result in blurred vision, distortion of vision, and glare.  These symptoms are more likely when the central cornea is involved in eye injury.

Corneal trauma from foreign bodies often require treatment with medications to prevent infection and scar tissue.  It is important to select the proper medications. In addition, surgery may be required to seal a laceration, remove damages tissue, or remove a foreign body.  Removing a foreign body can be particularly important if the foreign body is metallic.  If left in the eye, metallic foreign bodies may decompose over time and cause chemical damage to structures inside the eye such as the lens and retina.

An eye expert for corneal trauma can be valuable for assessing causation of an eye injury, the extent of damage, and the impact of corneal trauma on vision.  A qualified board certified ophthalmologist can provide the expertise needed to understand these important issues.

Back to Ocular Expert Home Page from Eye Expert for Corneal Trauma

The Motor Sports Association recognizes that the sport of motor racing requires adequate vision to react quickly to a variety of racing situations. Vision standards for motor sports association is determined by criteria sent by the Federation Internationale de L’Automobile (FIA).  The regulation by the FIA is repeated below:

a) Visual acuity
i) Before or after correction, at least 9/10 for each eye, or 8/10 for one eye and 10/10 for the other;

ii) Any subject whose visual acuity in one eye only is diminished and cannot be improved who necessarily has contralateral vision, whether corrected or not, equal to or greater than 10/10, may obtain a driver’s license under the following conditions and after examination by a competent ophthalmic specialist:
- conformity with points b, c and d below;

- condition of the fundus excluding pigmentary retinal damage, any old or congenital damage shall be strictly unilateral.

- Blindness in one eye is absolutely excluded under the following conditions:

- blindness in one eye for less than 5 years.

In cases of blindness in one eye for more than 5 years, the FIA
Medical Commission alone may consider an application, based
on the results of the eye test described in Article 1.3.
In addition, for every problem arising from one of the exclusions
mentioned above, the FIA Medical Commission may, if it so
desires, and for each dossier submitted, seek the opinion of a
committee of experts.

b) Colour vision: normal (recourse to the Ishihara tables in doubtful cases and to the Farnsworth test or a similar system in cases of error); in any case, no errors in the perception of colours of the flags used in international competitions.

c) Static field of vision: at least 120 degrees, the central 20 degrees must be free from any alteration.

d) Stereoscopic vision: functional.  In case of doubt, it must be assessed using the Wirth, Bagolini (striated lenses) or similar tests.

e) Sight correction: the wearing of contact lenses is permitted provided that:

- these shall have been worn for at least 12 months and for a significant period that day.

- they are certified as  satisfactory for motor racing by the ophthalmic specialist who supplied them.

A written report by an eye specialist may be required by the Motor Sports Association.  The report is then reviewed by a specialist at the Motor Sports Association.

Absolutely excluded are the following:,

For further information, contact the Medical Administration at Motor Sports Association.

Source: Motor Sports Association of the United Kingdom. Motor Sports House. Riverside Park, Colnbrook, SL3 OHG, England. Tel: 01753-765000  FAX: 01753-682938  www.msauk.org

Back to Ocular Expert Home Page from Vision Standards for Motor Sports Association

Board-certified ophthalmologists with extensive experience are normally well-qualified to address issues regarding standard of care for eye surgery.  A well-qualified expert eye witness may also provide testimony regarding common and important ocular conditions including cornea injury, glaucoma, cataract, retina disease, and optic nerve dysfunction.  Sometimes ophthalmologists address issues regarding vision and visibility.  These issues are important when understanding accidents and questions of causation.

In most legal cases, the plaintiff cannot prove the merits of his case unless his arguments are supported by a qualified expert eye witness.  An ophthalmologist can testify concerning issues of “standard of care” and “causation.”

Standard of care refers to what a reasonable and prudent ophthalmologist would have done under similar or identical circumstances.  Causation refers to actions that probably led to or contributed to injuries and damages suffered.  For causation to have meaning in a legal action, there must be a cause and effect relationship with quantifiable monetary damages that can be assessed.  For example, if a person is exposed to a potential problem due to negligence, but doesn’t actually suffer injury or damages, than filing and prosecuting a legal action is usually not worthwhile.

Damages are divided into two categories: economic and non-economic.  Economic damages include out-of-pocket expenses such as lost present and future earnings, medical bills, and expenses related to a negligent event.  Economic damages are based on the monetary amount of these losses.  On the other hand, non-economic damages are also known as “pain and suffering” damages.  Monetary awards for pain and suffering are meant to compensate for physical disability or impairment, or impaired enjoyment resulting from negligence.  Loss of comfort, love, and care fit into this category.

California law has limits that apply to non-economic damages.  Currently, no matter how much pain and suffering was caused by negligence, the cap of an award for this category in California courts is $250,000.  In California, this cap has been in existence since 1975.  On the other hand, monetary losses under California law do not have any limits.

A board-certified eye expert witness for eye surgery can assess the need and prognosis for surgical intervention.  Eye surgery can be an expensive undertaking and take an emotional toll.  The success of eye surgery can depend on a variety of conditions including comorbidities, postoperative care, and complicating variables.

A qualified California expert eye witness for eye surgery should have the knowledge and experience to assess the merits of a case.  When appropriate, convincing testimony from an expert eye witness is crucial for properly adjudicating legal issues for either the plaintiff or defendant.

Back to Ocular Expert Home Page from California Eye Witness for Eye Surgery

Back to Ocular Expert Testimony from California Eye Witness for Eye Surgery

The value of eye socket injuries can range from a few hundred dollars to many millions of dollars.  In 2012, a jury awarded $6 million to a school bus driver from Compton, California, who sued three Los Angeles county sheriff’s for claims of false arrest, malicious prosecution, and conspiracy (Case number CV-08-05214).  The plaintiff, Deon Richard Dirks, said that the deputies forced him from his vehicle after a routine traffic stop and beat him.  Dirks has been pulled over for speeding.  The severe beating resulted in a broken left eye socket, also known as a blow-out fracture of the orbit.

Dirks has been driving his mother’s Buick Park Avenue sedan.  When asked to get out of the vehicle, Dirks replied that the driver’s side of his car was jammed.  Dirks said that after getting out of the car,  a deputy placed his gun against Dirks’ back while his arm as pulled behind his back.  Deputies then used pepper spray to subdue Dirks and punched him in the face.  The deputies argued that it was Dirks was belligerent and that they had probable cause to arrest Dirks for committing a moving violation.

The trial revealed that Dirks did not produce his license, delayed getting out of his car, and resisted handcuffing by pulling his arm away.  A spokesman from the sheriff’s office described the force used by the deputies to subdue Dirks as appropriate.  However, the jury thought otherwise.  The jury awarded Dirks $6 million.

Eye socket injuries can result in significant medical and vision problems.  A significant injury to the eye socket that causes bones of the socket (orbit) to break can displace the eye and cause double vision.  A broken bone adjacent to a sinus can result in infection.

Eye socket injuries from whatever cause need to be properly evaluated and treated appropriately.  The presence of an eye socket injury can be indicative of significant trauma.  Juries often consider the significance of an eye socket injury or blow-out orbital fracture when rendering their verdict.

Reference: Faturechi, Robert. Beating Victim Gets Award. AA3:  Los Angeles Times, April 14, 2012

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Verdict for Eye Socket Injury

Federal Rule 26 requires full disclosure of anticipated testimony of an expert to reduce costs associated with expert discovery. An expert report gives opposing counsel a reasonable opportunity to prepare cross examination and arrange for possible rebuttal from other experts. In many situations, an expert report provides information that can be used for a well-informed decision regarding settlement.

An appropriate eye expert report must contain the following elements:

1) A complete statement of all the opinions of the expert and the rationale for them;

2) The facts or data considered by the expert in forming his opinions;

3) Any exhibits that the expert uses to summarize and support his opinions;

4) A description of the expert’s qualifications, including a list of all puiblications authored by the expert in the previous ten years;

5) A list of cases in which the expert as testified at deposition or trial during the previous four years;

6) A statement of compensation to be paid for participation in the case.

Retaining counsel can be very helpful to experts by ensuring that an expert report contains opinions that are clearly elucidated and supported by relevant information. Opinions are subject to careful scrutiny. The facts on which the opinions are formed, the methods utilized to interpret facts, and the logic to formulate opinions are carefully analalyzed. By the same token, information considered by an expert, but not relied on, can also be of importance when understanding the perspective of an expert and analyzing the validity of his opinions. Courts commonly require disclosure of all materials reviewed by an expert, and cross examination can reveal why specific material was rejected and not determinative in arriving at an opinion.

A net opinion is an unsupported statement that should not be incorporated in an expert report. Similarly, opinions that are contingent on events that “could” or “may” have occurred, or findings that “suggest” a possible scenario, are insufficient for inclusion in an expert report. Opinions proferred by an eye expert are strongest when they are clearly supported by factual logic.

Signing of a report by the expert is mandated under Federal Rule 26 for good reason. A signed report assures the parties that “…the expert has freely authorized and adopted as his own and not merely for appeasement or because of intimidation or siome undue unfluence by the party retained by him.” (Marek v. Moore, 171 F.R.D. 298, 302 (D. Kan. 1997) Although an expert may have others assist in the preparation of his report, his signature signifies his final repsonsibility in the expression and content of the report.

Opposing counsel has the right under Federal Rule 26 to depose individuals who have been designated as an expert. If a report is required, the deposition may be conducted only after a report is provided. Draft reports prepared by experts are generally protected from disclosure. By the same token, communication between an expert and retaining counsel regarding his expert witness report is protected with the following important exceptions:

1) Compensation of the expert;

2) Identification of facts or data provided by retaining counsel that were considered by the expert in formulating his opinions;

3) Communication of assumptions provided by retaining counsel.

Of course, all communication between an expert and counsel is subject to discovery in order to determine applicability of these exceptions. An expert who claims priviledge or protection of materials used for trial preparation is required to expressly file a claim of such with the court. The expert is obligated to preserve the contested material in his possession until his claim is resolved.

Reports submitted by an eye expert under Federal Rule 26 are subject to stringent requirements. An expert report that clearly elucidates opinions and the basis of those opinions can be a valuable resource in litigation. Eye expert witness reports that comply with Federal Rule 26 will be able to stand up under close scrutiny.

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Federal Rule 26 for Eye Expert Witness Reports

Processing of amniotic tissue is an important consideration when evaluating proper use. Al tissue harvested must meet stringent criteria for donor screening and laboratory testing. This aspect is essential to reduce the risk of transmission of infectious diseases. The standards for obtaining and processing amniotic membranes for eye surgery are established by the American Association of Tissue Banks (AATB) and the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Full informed consent of mothers of newborn children is needed to obtain amniotic tissue for medical use. Donors must agree to an extensive medical history, family history, and social history. Donors who provide a history of certain medical problems, genetic familial diseases, or social activities that include high-risk sexual activity can be excluded as tissue donors. Potential donors are screened for a number of infectious diseases including human immunodeficiency virus, syphilis, cytomegalovirus, as well as Hepatitis B and C. Companies that offer amniotic tissue have the responsibility to meet public health guidelines to determine appropriate donor suitability.

Strict criteria are utilized used to process and sterilize amniotic tissue form ophthalmic use. Established quality-control methods are used to thoroughly clean and sterilize amniotic tissue. It is important that all residues be elimination and sterilization that does not lead to deleterious effects of the tissue be utilized. Antibiotics are often used to maintain sterilization of processed tissue.

The site of implantation in the eye needs to meet specific requirements. The presence of active infection is a contraindication to the use of amniotic tissue. Patients who have excessive dry eyes or other condition that may lead to a high-risk of post-operative complications or graft rejection are usually not ideal recipients for amniotic tissue graft.

Proper preparation and reconstitution of amniotic tissue graft is essential for successful implantation. Aseptic technique is vital to prevent contamination of the graft and the receptive field for tissue grafting. It is important to utilize sterile instruments and to avoid touching the inner packaging containing the graft from touching anything outside the sterile field. Proper placement of the amniotic tissue graft involves identification of the basement membrane of the graft by embossed lettering and position within the pouch. The FDA also requires proper recordkeeping for recipients who have had tissue grafting for eye surgery.

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Legal Issues Involving Tissue Grafting for Eye Surgery

The language of ophthalmology can be a difficult for a lay person to understand. This is partially because ophthalmologists utilize a unique system of medical abbreviations. For example, recording of vision can be done in several mathematical formats. Many concepts in ophthalmology that include optics and the structure of the eye can also be difficult for a layman to comprehend. The use of understandable language by an expert may be of great benefit to all parties in a legal case.

Fortunately, many technical and complex concepts in ophthalmology may be explained through the use of effective visual aids. Pictures, illustrations, video, and blow-ups and other forms of visual aids may help jurors understand and retain information that they can apply to the evidence being offered. Jurors are often very receptive to an eye expert witness who use appropriate visual aids.

The use of visual aids also helps alleviate the drudgery of technical and longwinded testimony. It is desirable for visual aids presented at trial such as videos, computer-aided graphics, are pre-tested to confirm that they work properly. Diagrams and poster photos may be kept as a backup in case a technical problem prevents the use of electronic media.

Analogies can also be used to simplify complex concepts into language that is clear and understandable. For example, a cornea with astigmatic shape may be described as a surface that is similar to a football as opposed to a baseball. The use of language that is understandable by the average juror without being overly simplistic or patronizing is a desirable attribute for a forensic eye witnesses who provide testimony at deposition or trial.

Forensic ophthalmology cases often involve technical concepts involving the eye and vision. The appropriate use of language and visual aids can be helpful in communicating unfamiliar concepts in the litigation process.

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Forensic Eye Expert

General Allegations

1) Plaintiff is a resident of the city of __, County of ___, State of California.

2) The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 150 inclusive are unknown to plaintiff who, therefore, sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend this Complaint ton assert the true names of said Defendants when such information becomes available.

3) Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each of the fictitiously-names Defendants is negligently responsible or responsible in some other manner for the occurrences alleged in this Complaint, and that plaintiff’s damages were legally caused by the conduct of these fictitiously-named defendants.

4) Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times herein mentioned, defendants and each of them were the agent, employee and joint venture of each of the remaining defendants and in doing or omitting to do the things alleged herein, each was acting within the course, scope and purpose of said agency, employment and joint venture with the acquiescence, subsequent ratification, permission, and consent of each and every remaining defendant.

5) Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times herein mentioned each of the Defendants was the successor-in-interest to each of the remaining Defendants, and on that basis, is liable for any act, or omission, of said Defendants alleged in this Complaint.

6) Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therein alleges, the Defendant ___, is a corporation existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business in Santa Fe Springs, ___ County, State of California, and is doing business as ____.

7) Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant ___ is a corporation existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business in ____, ___ County, State of California.

8] Defendants Does 1 through 150, and each of them, is a business entity whose exact name and form are currently unknown to plaintiff are and were authorized to do business and doing business in California.  Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, the Defendants ____, dba ___, ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, were doing business in California, and that they manufactured and sold the defective [product], as further described in this Complaint, thereby seriously injury plaintiff’s eye on or about [date].

9) Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendants ____, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, at all times relevant herein, were distributors of [product], which were purchased by Plaintiff, and which ultimately malfunctioned, as further described within this Complaint, thereby seriously injuring plaintiff on or about [date].  Further, plaintiff is informed and believes, ans therein alleges, that Defendants ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, at all time relevant herein, owned, maintained, or controlled the premises which plaintiff lawfully entered to obtain access to purchase the defective party balloons which malfunctioned, as further described within this Complaint, thereby seriously injuring plaintiff on or about [date].

10) Venue is property in the Judicial District because the Cause of Action arose in this Judicial District.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR PRODUCTS LIABILITY PREDICATED ON NEGLIGENCE BY PLAINTIFF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

11) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 10, inclusive, of his/her general obligations as if fully set forth herein.

12) At all times herein mentioned, Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, were engaged in the business of manufacturing, designing, assembling, compounding, testing, inspecting, packaging, labeling, fabricating, constructing, analyzing, distributing, servicing, merchandising, recommending, advertising, promoting, marketing, and/or selling a certain ____, for use by members of the general public.

13) At all times herein mentioned, Defendants ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, were engaged in the business of distributing, supplying, assembling, and selling, or were in the chain of distribution of the previously-described ____.

14) Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150 and each of them had a duty to excercise care not to negligently manufacture or design or distribute defective ___.  Defendants and each of them had a duty to inspect the [product] and a duty to give warning of the dangerous conditions of the [product], which are likely to be dangerous to consumers.

15) At all times herein mentioned, Defendants ____, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, knew or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that the previously-described [product] was a product of such a nature that if it were not properly manufactured, designed, assembled, compounded, analyzed, distributed, services, merchandised, recommended, warned, instructed, advertised, promoted, marketed, and sold, for the use and purpose for which it was intended, it was likely to cause serious injury to the person or persons by whom it was used and for whose safety it was originally intended.

16) At all times herein mentioned, Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, so negligently and carelessly manufactured, designed, assembled, compounded, tested or failed to test, inspected or failed to inspect, packaged labeled, fabricated, constructed, analyzed, distributed, serviced. merchandised, recommended, warned, instructed, advertised, promoted, marketed and sold the previously-described [product] so that it was in a dangerous and defective condition and unsafe for the use and purpose for which it was intended when used as recommended by the defendants, and each of them, thereby breaching their duty.

17) The defective and dangerous character and condition of the previously-described [product], in that it was unsafe for the use and purpose for which it was intended when used as recommended by Defendants ____, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, was known to Defendants ____, and each of them, was known to Defendants, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, or in the exercise of ordinary care should have been known and discovered by them.  Furthermore, the dangerous and defective character and condition of the previously-described [product] was not made known to plaintiff by Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150.

18) Prior to the incident of ___, Defendants ____, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, sold, for valuable consideration to plaintiff the previously-described [product].

19) On or about ___ while plaintiff was properly operating ___ in order to use them as ______, a purpose for which the [product] were intended, and as a legal result of the aforementioned negligence and carelessness of Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, the [product] malfunctioned by bursting and releasing toxic substances which got into plaintiff’s eyes, thereby causing serious and severe injuries to plaintiff.  Such injuries include but are not limited to blindness.

20) As a legal result of the negligence of the Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, plaintiff was hurt and injured in her health, strength, and activity, sustaining injury to her eyes and person, all of which injuries have caused and will continue to cause her great mental, physical, and nervous pain and suffering.  Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that such injuries will result in some permanent disability to her.  As a result of such injuries, plaintiff has suffered general damages in an amount to be proven at the time of the trial of this action.

21) As a further result of the negligence of the Defendants ____, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, plaintiff has incurred, and will continue to incur, medical and related expenses for physicians, surgeons, hospital care, and other medical services and supplies.  The full amount of these expenses is not known to plaintiff at this time.  Plaintiff prays leave to amend this Complaint to state the amount when it becomes known to him.

22) As a further legal result of the negligence of the Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, plaintiff has necessarily suffered a loss of earning capacity, and he/she is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that she will continue such a loss for an indefinite time in the future.  Plaintiff’s earning capacity has been greatly reduced, all to her further special damages in amounts currently unknown.  Plaintiff prays leave to amend this Complaint to assert the true amounts when they are ascertained.

23) WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, as hereinafter set forth.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR STRICT PRODUCTS LIABILITY IN TORT BY PLAINTIFF AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

24) Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 22, inclusive, of her general allegations as if fully set forth herein.

25) Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, manufactured, designed, assembled, compounded, tested or failed to test, inspected or failed to inspect, packaged, labeled, fabricated, constructed, analyzed, distributed, serviced, merchandised, recommended, warned, instructed, advertised, promoted, marketed, and/or sold a certain product of [product], which were intended by the Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, to be used in the following manner: ____

26) Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, knew that the previously-described [product] were to be purchased, an used without inspection for defects by plaintiff and the general public.

27) The previously-described [product] were unsafe for its intended use because of defects in its manufacture, design, testing, warnings, installation, components and constituents, so that it could not safely serve its purpose, but would instead expose the users of said product to serious injury because of failure of Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, to properly guard, protect, design, manufacture, distribute instruct, or warn the users of the previously-described {product] from these defective propensities.

28) Plaintiff was notr aware of said defects at any time prior to the injuries caused by the previously described [product].

29) Prior to the incident of [date], Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, sold, or otherwise transferred for valuable consideration to plaintiff the previously-described party balloons.

30) On or about [date] the previously-described [product] were sold to plaintiff for plaintiff’s use by Defendants ___, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150.

31) On or about [date] while plaintiff was properly inflating the [product] in order to use them as party decorations, a purpose for which the balloons were intended, and as a legal result of the aforementioned defective condition, the [product] malfunctioned by bursting and releasing a toxic substance which got into plaintiff’s eyes, thereby causing serious and severe injuries to plaintiff.  Such injuries include but is not limited to blindness.

32) As a legal result of the above-described defective condition, plaintiff on [date] was hurt and injured in her/his health, strength, and activity, sustaining injury to her/his nervous system and person, including blindness to her eyes, all of which injuries have caused and will continue to cause her great mental, physical, and nervous pain and suffering.  Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that such injuries will result in some permanent disability to her/him.  As a result of such injuries, plaintiff has suffered general damage in an amount to be proven at the time of the trial of this action.

33) As a further legal result of the above descr9bed defective condition, plaintiff has incurred, and will continue to incur, medical and related expenses for physicians, surgeons, hospital care, and other medical services and supplies.  The full amount of these expenses is not known to her/him at this time.  Plaintiff prays leave to amend this complaint to state the amount when it becomes known to her/him.

34) As a further legal result of the above described defective condition, plaintiff has necessarily suffer a loss of earning capacity, and plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that she will continue such a loss for an indefinite time in the future.  Plaintiff’s earning capacity has been greatly reduced, all to her further special damages in amounts currently unknown.  Plaintiff prays leave to amend this Complaint to assert the true amounts when they are ascertained.

35) WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against Defendants ____, dba ___, and Does 1 through 150, and each of them, as hereinafter set forth.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against defendants and each of them as follows.

FOR THE FIRST AND SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION EACH

1) For special damages in an amount according to proof;

2) For general damages for personal injury in an amount according to proof;

3) For cost of suit incurred herein;

4) For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.

Dated this ___ of ___, ___.

Law Offices of John Doe, Esq

By: John Doe
Attorney for Plaintiff

DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this web site is provided as a service to the Internet community, and does not constitute legal advice.   An attempt is made to provide quality information, but there is no claim, promise or guarantee about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this web site and its associated sites.  The free forms contained in this web site may not be appropriate for your particular needs.  As legal advice must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case, and laws are constantly changing, nothing provided herein should be used as a substitute for the advice of competent legal counsel.

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Products Liability Claim for Eye Injury

• Board certification with the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS).
• Have an active ophthalmology practice in the care and treatment of patients.
• Does not have a current practice that consists solely of performing medical/legal evaluations.
• Does not have a current practice that consists solely of evaluating patients for CalPERS.
• Provide timely evaluations of CalPERS ophthalmology patients, usually within three weeks of a CalPERS request.
• Provide timely written ophthalmology reports to CalPers, preferably within fourteen days of examination.
• Provide timely supplemental reports that are needed by CalPERS.  Supplemental reports are usually needed within seven days of request unless it is needed on a “rush” basis, in which case it is due within twenty-four hours.
• Provide requests for prior approval for additional time and for testing over $500.00.
• Provide specific standard information as required by CalPERS in addition to a standard written report.
• Adherence to an agreed-upon fee schedule.
• Provide preparation and willingness to appear and testify at administrative hearings.

Ophthalmology experts must be able to testify on a variety of issues.  Disability retirement for life or for the duration of a disability is an important topic for ocular expert analysis.  Ophthalmology experts need to be familiar with legal tests for determining substantial incapacity.  An IME examination is often geared to the specific issue that needs to be addressed.  For example, visual impairment that rises to a level that justifies disability is the function of an ocular expert.  In the event of a dispute, ophthalmology experts may be needed to testify as to the causation of disability from an industrial accident.

Reports from ophthalmology experts for CalPERS need to document the material reviews and knowledge of the job description.  If a member of CalPERS is substantially, incapacitated, the ophthalmology expert needs to indicate specific job duties that the member cannot perform and the reason to support such an assertion.  Detailed explanations are also necessary when an ophthalmology expert finds that the member is not substantially incapacitated, notwithstanding the alleged disabling condition.

Ophthalmology experts for CalPERS are limited to provide disability evaluations for CalPERS, and are not authorized to provide any form of treatment, invasive testing, treatment plan, or second opinions.  However, ophthalmology experts for CalPERS are a valuable resource that the agency relies on for accurate and fair assessment.

Click Here to Schedule Legal Consultation for case evaluation
or CalPERS ophthalmology IME

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Ophthalmology Experts for CalPERS

Arbitration and mediation are similar to the extent that both processes are alternatives to litigation.  Both arbitration and mediation utilize a “neutral” third party.  Sometimes in the case of arbitration, more than one “neutral” party is chosen.  Both arbitration and mediation can be binding, although it is customary to utilize mediation as a non-binding procedure and arbitration as a binding procedures.  Eye expert testimony may be helpful in assessing damages related to ocular injury, the visual prognosis, and the degree of long term care that may be needed.  Expert testimony may also be helpful when issues involve intellectual property issues that demand testimony on technical issues.

Arbitration and mediation have distinct differences. Arbitrators usually serve in a capacity that is similar to a judge in a civil rial.  Arbitrators make decisions about evidence.  Often, arbitrators ue formal rules of evidence, although they have great flexibility to determine admissability of evidence.  Arbitrators also provide written opinions.  Mediation is usually conducted before a “neutral” mediator who does not formally judge the case and come up with a verdict, but rather attempts to facilitate a discussion and a conclusive resolution of the dispute.  Mediation brings parties together in a “neutral” environment where the issues may be openly and confidentially presented to a “neutral” third party.  The parties of a dispute may listen to each others position, with the goal of coming to a binding written agreement.  An eye expert may be helpful in helping the parties understand vision issues involved a dispute.  An unbiased assessment by an eye expert may help bring together parties to facilitate a final resolution.

Many business contracts have provisions for dispute resolution that require parties to the agreement to first use mediation as a means to resolve a dispute. If mediation does not resolve the dispute, then the parties may move on to formal litigation through the court system or attempt resolution through arbitration.  Arbitration and formal liigation are far more time consuming and expensive than mediation.  Many business attorneys recommend inclusion of a mediation provision in any contract.

Eye experts providing testimony for mediation and arbitration need to be aware of the differences between these legal processes.  The goal of an eye expert is to provide credible testimony that helps facilitate a satisfactory resolution.

Return to Ocular Expert Home Page from Eye Expert Testimony for Mediation and Arbitration