Andrew Carothers, M.D., P.C. v GEICO Indem. Co., 2008 NY Slip Op 51775(U) (Civ Ct City NY, Kings County)
Expert witnesses, like any other witness can be questioned for the purpose of showing their feelings, bias or prejudice (see Herring v. Hayes, 135 App. Div. 2d 684). A medical expert can be questioned about fee arrangements, prior testimony for the same party, and financial interest in the outcome of the case (see Zimmer v Third Avenue R.R. Co., 36 App. Div. 273). In the case at bar, Plaintiff’s counsel thoroughly cross examined Dr. Bazos concerning the number of times he testified, his understanding of the use of peer reviews, the number of peer reviews he performed, the fees charged for each peer review and the fees he receives for his testimony at trial. Counsel also thoroughly cross examined Dr. Bazos concerning his basis for his opinion of lack of medical necessity, claiming that his opinion was contrary to the views expressed in Campbells Operative Orthopedics and that his opinion was reached based on his financial interests with the Defendant.While, it is well recognized that compensation has a direct and vital bearing on credibility, the fact that Dr. Bazos had a great deal of experience testifying on behalf of insurance [*3]companies does not alone support an inference that his opinion is not honest in this case (see Scott v. Spanjer Bros., Inc., 298 F.2d 928). Dr. Bazos evidence cannot be disregarded simply because he is an “employee” of the Defendant. While employment or other relationship of a witness may be considered on the point of his credibility in weighing his evidence against opposing evidence, it is not by itself a sufficient reason for disregarding his testimony. Although the fact that Dr. Bazos testified on numerous cases on behalf of Insurance Companies may support the inference of bias, if direct unimpeached, uncontradicted, and reasonable testimony is shown which is consistent with Dr. Bazos finding of lack of medical necessity, no lawful finding can be made of the existence of bias (see Arnall Mills v. Smallwood, 68 F. 2d 57). And if any bias was established it would simply go to the weight given to the testimony (see Khan v. New York State Dept. Of Health, 17 App. Div. 3d 938). To establish the existence of bias sufficient to disregard Dr. Bazos testimony, Plaintiff would have to show that his opinion flowed from the claimed bias (see Cohen v. Mills, 271 App. Div. 2d 826).