Expert Reports & Litigation Testimony Support
A report that holds up when it is attacked.
Expert reports and courtroom testimony on our investigative findings, built on sound methodology and a documented foundation. Former FBI agents and attorneys. Licensed in New York State.
Former FBIAttorney LedLicensed in New York State
The Gatekeeper
The judge decides whether your expert is ever heard.
Under the Daubert standard, a judge screens expert testimony before a jury can weigh it, and challenged experts are excluded far more often than most people expect. A report has to be built to survive that gate.
46%
of challenged experts are excluded, in whole or in part
52%
the exclusion rate in fraud cases, the highest of any type
3,342
expert challenges the leading study has analyzed
2x
plaintiff experts are challenged twice as often as the defense
Source: PwC, Daubert Challenges to Financial Experts (a multi-year study of federal and state opinions).
The Odds
Nearly half of challenged experts never reach the jury.
When an expert is challenged under Daubert, the testimony is excluded, in whole or in part, close to half the time, and the rate is even higher in the kinds of matters we work most. Fraud cases carry the steepest exclusion rate of any case type. An opinion that is never admitted cannot help your case, no matter how right it is.
Exclusion rate of challenged experts, by case type
Fraud matters carry the highest risk of exclusion.
Fraud cases52%
Overall average46%
Antitrust cases36%
Source: PwC, Daubert Challenges to Financial Experts.
Where Reports Fail
It usually comes down to method, not conclusion.
Here is what surprises people: to knock out an expert, opposing counsel does not have to prove the conclusion is wrong. Under Rule 702, they only have to show the method is unreliable or the opinion does not fit the case. The most common ground for exclusion, by a wide margin, is reliability, followed by relevance. And because a challenge is built on the written report the expert files under Rule 26, the report is exactly where a case is won or lost.
The grounds behind most exclusions
Reliability of the method comes first, then relevance to the case.
Reliability of the method52%
Relevance to the case36%
Source: study of court decisions on expert admissibility, Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal.
What We Provide
Reports and testimony built to survive.
Our experts do not opine on what they cannot support. We document investigative findings, surveillance, fraud and financial analysis, and digital evidence, along with the methods behind them, in a written report that states every opinion and the basis for it. Then we testify to it. Because a Daubert challenge attacks the report rather than the conclusion, the discipline that goes into the report is what carries the testimony.
Expert investigative reportsRule 26 expert disclosuresSurveillance & evidence documentationMethodology & foundationRebuttal & critique reportsDeposition preparationTrial testimonyExhibits & demonstratives
How We Work
How we build a report that holds.
Every report is built from the standard backward, so it is ready for challenge before the challenge ever comes.
01
Case and issue review
We work with counsel to define the questions, the standard that applies, and exactly what has to be proven.
02
Sound methodology
We settle on a defensible, generally accepted approach at the outset, so the method can stand on its own under scrutiny.
03
Fact and evidence foundation
We document the facts, sources, and chain of custody the opinion rests on, leaving nothing for the other side to pull loose.
04
The written report
You receive a clear Rule 26 report that states every opinion with its basis and reasons, cited to the sources behind it.
05
Deposition preparation
We ready the expert and coordinate with counsel so the testimony is consistent, supported, and prepared for challenge.
06
Testimony that holds
We deliver clear, credible testimony that withstands a Daubert challenge and cross examination.
Why Insight
Federal experience. Legal discipline. Evidence that holds.
Our team brings more than 70 years of combined investigative, intelligence, and legal experience to the private sector.
Former FBI and national security
Our experts come from the FBI and national security backgrounds, with the qualifications and credibility that testimony demands.
Attorney led, built to the standard
Attorneys guide every report, so the work is measured against Daubert, Rule 26, and the demands of admissibility from the start.
Licensed in New York State
We are fully licensed New York State investigators, working within state privacy, surveillance, and investigative law.
Discreet, neutral, defensible
We report only what the evidence supports, which is what makes an opinion hold up under the hardest cross examination.
Questions
Common questions about expert reports and testimony.
What kinds of expert reports and testimony do you provide?
We provide reports and testimony on our investigative findings: surveillance, fraud and financial investigations, digital and documentary evidence, background and due diligence, and the methods behind them. Each report is written to state every opinion and its basis, and we testify to those findings in deposition and at trial.
Why does the report matter so much?
Under Rule 26, an expert must file a report stating every opinion and the basis and reasons for it. The opposing side builds its challenge on that report, so a rigorous, well-documented report with a sound method is your strongest protection against exclusion.
What is a Daubert challenge, and how do you survive one?
It is a motion to exclude an expert on the ground that the testimony is unreliable or irrelevant. We survive it the same way each time: a generally accepted methodology, a documented factual foundation, clear qualifications, and a report that shows all of it plainly.
Can you rebut the other side's expert?
Yes. We can examine an opposing expert's methodology, data, and foundation, identify where it does not hold, and prepare a rebuttal report and testimony that puts those weaknesses in front of the court.
An opinion is only as good as it is on cross.
Partner with a licensed New York State investigator, in complete confidence. Former FBI, attorney led, and built for court.
Sources & Data
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Daubert Challenges to Financial Experts: A Yearly Study of Trends and Outcomes. Exclusion rates of challenged experts overall and by case type, and the frequency of challenges. Figures reflect challenges to financial experts as studied by PwC.
Study of court decisions on the admissibility of expert testimony, Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal. The grounds most often cited for exclusion, led by reliability and relevance.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). The admissibility standard and the expert report requirement.
Former FBI professionals, attorneys, and national security experts delivering high-integrity private investigations built for legal, corporate, and high-risk environments.
INSIGHTS
- The Insider Threat Sitting Inside Your Company Right Now
- Due Diligence Failures That Cost Companies Millions
- Before You Sue, Know the Facts: Why Smart Attorneys Use Investigators Before Filing
- Social Media Never Forgets: How Digital Investigations Expose Contradictions
- The CFO Is Not the Only Risk: How Internal Fraud Hides in Plain Sight
Reach Us
We are diligent and determined because we care about our clients.
1335 Jefferson Rd, Rochester, NY 14623