Engaging Experts
After 25 years helping litigators find the right expert witnesses, Round Table Group’s network contains some of the world’s greatest experts. On this podcast, we talk to some of them about what’s new in their field of study and their experience as expert witnesses.
Engaging Experts
Engaging with Food Marketing Expert, Dr. John Stanton
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
In this episode…
Our guest, Dr. John Stanton, is a Professor of Food Marketing at St. Joseph’s University and a sought-after expert witness in food marketing and product development, advertising, and sales. He is in the European Retail Association’s and Private Label Manufacturers’ halls of fame. Dr. Stanton is a frequent conference speaker. He has a Ph.D. in Quantitative Methods and Marketing from St. Joseph’s University.
Staying engaged in your field through work or academia is important, according to Dr. Stanton. He notes that when expert witness work is not your primary career, it is easier to say “no” to engagements you aren’t an excellent fit for, which is essential in maintaining credibility.
Check out the entire episode discussing not taking anything personally, reasonable fees, and the ramifications of being published.
Introduction to Dr. John Stanton
Speaker 1This episode is brought to you by Roundtable Group the experts on experts. We've been connecting attorneys with experts for over 25 years. Find out more at roundtablegroupcom.
Speaker 2Welcome to Discussions at the Roundtable. I'm your host, noah Balmer, and today I'm excited to welcome Dr John Stanton to the show. He's the professor of food marketing at St Joseph's University and a sought after expert witness in food marketing and product development, advertising, sales and sales management. Professor Stanton is both the European Retail Association and private label manufacturers respective halls of fame. He's a frequent conference speaker and he holds a PhD in quantitative methods and marketing from St Joseph's University. Dr Stanton, thank you so much for joining me here today at the Roundtable.
Speaker 3My pleasure to be here.
Speaker 2Let's jump into it. You've been in food marketing since it looks like the early 1970s. How did you first get into expert witnessing?
Speaker 3I had been in food marketing, as you said, having consulted with Campbell Soup for quite a few years, and we got a call from some lawyers that were representing the state of Pennsylvania. Lawyers that were representing the state of Pennsylvania and my colleague and I had absolutely no idea what it meant to be an expert witness, but they said they were going to pay us. So we said it's a good idea.
Speaker 2Fair enough.
First Experience as Expert Witness
Speaker 3Since that time, I think I learned quite a bit about being an expert witness. The first time I did it, though, I was really undergone in terms of what the other side had and what they knew and what was going on, and it was really an interesting learning experience for me.
Speaker 2Do you think that it is a failing on the part of the attorney to not adequately prepare newer expert witnesses in those sorts of situations? To what extent does the expert witness need to take it upon themselves to be ready, and how much of that is the engaging attorney's responsibility?
Speaker 3Well, I think the attorneys generally do a pretty good job. I think also, since I've done about 50 cases, you know they feel less obligation to spend time. In the beginning I think they spent time with the most basic things. It's some of the subtleties that are the things that you can only learn, I think, through experience. A good example of that would be the recognition that the opposing attorneys don't really hate you, that their job is to discredit and you cannot under any circumstance take that personally. That personally, you know it's kind of like now I feel like, well, that's their job and my job is to answer the question and not get angry or not get upset. Just listen to the question and answer the question. Understand that's their job. I think they could tell the younger, the newer I should say expert witnesses about that. But until you're in that environment it's tough.
Handling Challenging Depositions
Speaker 2Let's talk about those situations a little bit. Does this typically come up in something like a Dobert hearing, or is it in the depositions or even during cross-examination? What are the situations in which expert witnesses find themselves impeached vis-a-vis their expertise?
Speaker 3Sure, I find the worst case scenario is in the deposition itself. You know the attorney that you're with really can't object. You have to answer all the questions and when you get into trial I mean you can't change any of these things from that deposition position. So you really have to be super careful there. I remember a case I think I said the company should have, should have, and the attorney with all of their activity, you know what do you mean. And they read from the transcript of the deposition and then there I said could have. And you know which is it, dr Stanton? Is it should or could? Do you have any idea what it is you're talking? You know I mean the traditional stuff, stuff. But so you really have to be careful so uh does I.
Speaker 2I assume this also comes up in rebuttal reports. Uh, from time to time when, uh, you write an expert witness report and then they come back saying, no, his expert witness report is wrong. For these reasons, do they usually try to impeach your logic or are they trying to impeach you as an expert?
Speaker 3Mostly I have found the logic because I think my background is pretty secure, so it's mostly the logic. I had recently a situation where I had to do some forecasting and I thought I did a pretty good job and in this case the jury rejected that whole position and I came back and said how could they do that? It made no sense.
Speaker 2You know, once you get to a jury, you got no idea, what's going to happen that you find help you kind of make a connection with them, either through body language or through perhaps something like visual aids.
Connecting with Juries
Speaker 3Two things I try to just be the average Joe. I try not to appear like a highfalutin expert that's coming in to set the situation straight, etc. I try to use basic language and to just be one of the guys. I have a style and I'm probably giving this away, but I have a style with the opposing attorneys where I try and be a nice guy, always say sir, always say I'm sorry, sir. Could you repeat that again? I don't mean to be. I mean I try to be as polite as I can be to the other attorney.
Speaker 2Under heavy cross-examination. How do you go about maintaining that polite, stoic demeanor? It's my job.
Speaker 3Before I face the guy, I literally say, look, he doesn't hate you. I mean his job is to rip you to shreds. Hate you, I mean his job is to rip you to shreds and your job is to continue smiling and answer his questions. I mean, any expert, in my opinion, that loses his temper probably shouldn't be an expert. You know, that's the job is to maintain, and I've, you know, I've lost my temper on it on a couple of occasions.
International Marketing Expertise
Speaker 3I remember one time it was involved with international food marketing and the opposing attorney says Dr Stanton, you're not even in international marketing, are you? He says Dr Stanton, you're not even in international marketing, are you? And I said, yes, I am. I mean, I've lived in four different countries. I've taught food marketing in these countries. I teach international marketing, food marketing. You know international marketing, food marketing, you know. And he says well, on the website you're not listed as one of the people teaching international food marketing. I said, well, I don't care what the school says. I mean, you know they, I don't even know what they have. And he kept it up and I said, look, raising my temper. I said, look, I'm leaving here and going back to the university and teach international food marketing. Tonight, you know, the attorney next to me just kind of under the table, you know, patted me on the leg. Take it easy, sure, but it just I don't know what it was, but it just kind of bugged me that he kept on it after I thought I made it clear.
Speaker 2Yeah, it's interesting you bring up your experience in an international role. Have you worked as an expert witness in international venues as well?
Speaker 3Not in venues, but court cases in this country that involve the business in other countries. Oh, interesting, which, uh, by the way, it's kind of funny this case that I just referred to, um, involved germany and their expert witness spoke fluent German. So the guy, the attorney, says to me the way he always talked, you know? So, dr Sand, you don't even speak German, do you? I said, well, I get along a little bit in German. And he says, well, can you tell me the word for apple pie? And I said apple poof it. He picked about the only word I knew. If he asked just about any other word, I wouldn't have known it, but I knew apple pie, which when he heard it, he immediately stopped asking that line of question.
Speaker 2Do you find that you have to do when you're working? When he heard it, he immediately stopped asking that line of question. Do for that or, in fact, any other cases where you're handed your materials from the engaging attorney and it's not. It doesn't quite cover everything and you find yourself needing to do a significant amount of supplementary research to do your report or to perform in a deposition.
Case Selection and Academic Background
Speaker 3You know, that's a really good question for a newer person. I found that I always have to do some additional research. The materials that your attorney gives you are in the best interest of your attorney, and so it's good to make sure you know all the issues, not just the issues that they select, and, of course, related to that is you also need to make sure that this is a topic that you can represent well for your client. If you're uncomfortable with what they're saying, don't do it, because it will come out in the deposition, they'll nail you on it, and it's just best to forego that opportunity.
Speaker 2That brings us to kind of the vetting process. When you're on those phone calls, you get a call that they need an expert witness. What is the calculus that goes on in determining whether or not you're going to take the case? Now, obviously, the first among them will be am I in fact an expert in this area? But beyond that, how do you decide whether or not you're going to accept an engagement?
Speaker 3Do I believe that this person has been harmed or this company has been harmed by the behavior of the other company? That's number one. Then number two is does it appear that I have the background to be able to opine on that?
Speaker 2As an academic, do you feel that that has helped prepare you for a lot of the expert witness work that you do? Not only the subject matter, but the way that you engage with people and juries and judges Do you find that it has affected your temperament when you're in court?
Speaker 3I think that anybody that has a job where they have to stand in front of a group of people talking you know, whether it's lecturing students or doing some other you know type of work that it helps you. Just being comfortable in that regard, yeah, I think it helps quite a bit. I think if you publish a fair amount, which I do, you have more experience in how to do the research to follow. I also think I have access to a lot of material online from the university. So, yeah, I think it does. I think the big thing is, since this isn't my primary source of income, I'm much more willing to be frank and honest with the client if they decide they don't want me to do it or I don't want to do it, it's not a major financial stream loss. How am I going to pay the rent this month? So I think it helps a lot in that regard that it isn't my primary income source.
Speaker 2For expert witnesses who aren't necessarily in the career of their expertise. In other words, you're a professor rather than working for an advertising agency. How do you keep up to date on your own knowledge and, more generally, how can expert witnesses in those situations, because there are a fair number of academics. What strategies can you employ to make sure that you are up to date and well-versed in the most current goings on of your niche?
Changes in Expert Witnessing
Speaker 3You know it's. One of the positives that I believe I have with the client is that as a food marketer, I publish both, you know, academic articles. Do you know what an academic article is? I mean, it's an article that no one reads. But I've also written a number of books. But I stay pertinent in the field of food marketing. I go to the National Grocers Association meetings, I go to the Food Marketing Institute meetings and I believe that I stay reasonably pertinent, you know, to the field of food marketing.
Speaker 2As somebody who is well-published, do you have any concerns about having something that you said offhanded in a book somewhere? Maybe you wrote it 30 years ago that maybe you've changed your mind about, or maybe it just wasn't. It was out of context. Something like that. With such a large body of work, how do you maintain a library of knowledge in your head about everything that you've ever said?
Speaker 3I mean, that's a good question. There have been a couple of occasions. Generally speaking, I have pretty good recollection of what I thought at that time and I probably haven't changed my mind on many of those things. But I would say that there are times when I'd say, geez, what did I write about? That, you know? I mean because I know the other side's going to find it. But to be honest with you, I'm pretty clear on what was my beliefs about these various topics over time?
Speaker 2Sure, as somebody who's been at this for quite a while now, have you seen any changes in the field, anything significant that is different from when you first got started in expert witnessing, compared to now, for example, technology, maybe things like Zoom.
Speaker 3Oh yeah, Geez, the main thing is being able to have documents delivered on time. Interesting oh yeah, the main thing is being able to have documents delivered online. Interesting. In days of yore, I would get four or five boxes delivered to my house of materials to read. Now it's all delivered online. That's a major thing for me. Another change is you always had to go someplace else to be deposed, whereas now you can be deposed like you and I are it's different in any kind of a fundamental way.
Speaker 2When you're online rather than face to face, do you have to uh consider your demeanor or or what you're wearing, or how good your webcam is, or anything like that it's, it's the opposite.
Speaker 3I believe that partly, partly, what I've done well is an actor and I believe that a lot of the you know. And another thing believe that a lot of the you know.
Speaker 3And another thing you know a lot of the things like that uh, I, I dress nicely, so I'm, you know, I I don't think that people get to see what I look like enough, you know. So I, I prefer to be there in person, of course I prefer to teach in person. That you there in person, of course I prefer to teach in person. That puts me in the minority already, but for me personally I like to do it in person and I know it's a big cost savings and I understand that I'm happy to do it any way they want.
Stories from the Courtroom
Speaker 2Do you have a story or two about any cases? Obviously, you don't have to go into any specific details of the cases. That changed the way that you go about expert witnessing fundamentally or reinforced a behavior or position that you take on expert witnessing.
Speaker 3There was a case involving two privately held companies that the presidents were just at each other and when I looked at the case I said to myself what are these guys arguing about? I mean, this should have been settled in a minute and a half, you know. One of the things, for example, was the other side claimed that our client had released proprietary information. We said but it was in a national advertisement. You can't call something proprietary.
Speaker 1It's in a national ad.
Speaker 3So there were a lot of these little things. You can't call something proprietary, that's international law. So there were a lot of these little things and I realized that it really wasn't about the law. No-transcript, and I have so many cases like that that you have to realize that these people are fighting over nothing. In many of the cases it was really two millionaires fighting about $200. You know $200. And you just take that for what it is. You don't make judgments about whether it makes sense that they do these things.
Speaker 3I've asked to do a job, I've asked to offer an opinion. I make it clear on some of the cases it's not that I would have a conflict, but I might have known people in the other companies etc. And I'd make it clear I'm offering an opinion on this point. I'm not making a judgment of whether you're right or wrong in terms of the court case. Yeah, you know, a specific thing actually was a supermarket. I had to do with a zoning case and I was offering an opinion on whether I thought something was within the zoning rules or not within the zoning rules, what something was within the zoning rules or not within the zoning rules. But I made it clear that I wasn't making any judgment on how good or how bad either of the two supermarkets were.
Speaker 3I will tell you one funny story, go for it. I was in a court case and the judge I'm now being in the stand testifying. And the judge says look, we're going to finish this by 5 o'clock, or I'll finish it at 5 o'clock because I've got to get a plane. I'm going to Brazil, I have to get through customs, et cetera. You figure out how to get me through customs quicker? We can stay longer. Well, I knew I'm sitting, I didn't know what to do and I looked over at the judge and I said your honor, you can get what's called the despotanchi. It's a person that does all of the, gets you all through customs and does everything for you. And so he talks with me about that for a couple minutes and I was really I didn't know whether I should do it or not, but he said because, if anyone knows, I used to live in Brazil. Because, if anyone knows, I used to live in Brazil.
Speaker 3So after that that guy protected me. You know the other side would do this and he said look, get out of here, you're not going to answer that question, you know, told me how to get through customs and he treated me after that like the golden boy.
Speaker 2That's great. That's great. Those, those are the little things that, uh, that expert witnesses talk about when they talk about what they get out of being an expert witness personally and along those lines, what do you find meaningful, what do you find important about expert being an expert witness?
Expert-Attorney Relationship
Speaker 3important about being an expert witness? First of all, because I'm also a university professor. I bring real examples that I know take place, without revealing, obviously, anything that I shouldn't reveal. I teach a class in food marketing research and I tell the class I said listen, not one example that we're going to talk about this semester will be out of the book. Every example will be something that I personally worked on and you know you do that to try and establish credibility with your students.
Speaker 2Sure, and I'm sure that it humanizes you. You know to talk about things that take place outside of the classroom. I always liked professors that use personal stories as well, back when I was in law school 100 years ago. While back when I was in law school 100 years ago, Along those lines, speaking of relationships, what makes for a good expert attorney relationship? What are the factors that lead to an engagement that's not only productive but also leaves you feeling good and has the attorney calling you when they need another expert, such as yourself?
Speaker 3Honestly, I feel like the opposing attorney has to be honest with what the real situation. There is a tendency on the attorneys to not reveal too much about what else they have going in this case, etc. But the more honest they can be, the more I appreciate doing the work and on my part I want to find the attorney receptive to what I'm saying and trust that I can be honest with them. Honest with that I do find like one of the very first questions I ask an attorney when we're talking is is our conversation protected? You know, in some states it's not protected at all. Everything that you produce, everything you talk about, they can get.
Speaker 3In other states an expert is equivalent to a client. So I like to find that out, because what I wouldn't want to do is not be entirely honest with the courts. I mean, if I said maybe you should have done this and the other side says did you ever tell them that wasn't? You know, even though it was just the two of us in the conversation, I would be uncomfortable not being totally above board with that. So I'm really careful when I find out it isn't protected.
Speaker 2That's an interesting point. Do you feel that expert witnesses should take a proactive approach in finding out those little well small but important the legal ramifications of what they say and do, or is it incumbent upon the expert witness to educate themselves on those things?
Speaker 3I've found that the attorneys are pretty good at telling you what are these things that would be affecting your like. They would say you know this is based on a case where the judge said you have to meet these five conditions. They usually tell you that kind of stuff. What they don't often do is give you the full picture of what it is that the case is about. About. You know it's it's they. They ask you to offer an opinion on this point, but you don't really know how they're intending to. You know, to, to. To put that point in a bigger case.
Billing and Learning Experiences
Speaker 2Sure, dr Stanton, with with a lot of cases moving towards settlement these days, I've had experts tell me more often than not, or the great majority, even sometimes, of their cases are moving to settlement. Does that change the way that you go about billing Between you and me 250,000 people who listen to this. Millions, millions.
Speaker 3I hardly ever even read a contract.
Speaker 2No kidding.
Speaker 3Yeah, I believe that my fees are well below the market. I basically charge by the hour. You know, if they say we're not going to court, okay, you know, it's the advantage of having another source of income. I just did a case that probably my fee was totally in the vicinity of $25,000 for the whole case. The opposing expert and you know this for facts because you asked the other side how much was $500,000. And I thought maybe I should raise my rates. But you know, I'm probably not a good one to offer financial kind of information because I really don't care. Well, fair enough, I I want to get paid for an hour's work. When I put an hour in, you know, I mean I'm I'm not saying I do this for for free, but it's just the way I was taught. My father always told me you do a day's worth for a day's worth. He worked hard and I'm very comfortable with everything I've ever made with any of the clients.
Speaker 3So at one time a group asked me just about at the end of getting ready to go to trial. They said listen, can you do a taste test for us? And I said well, we can't do a taste test. We only have like two weeks left. They said no, we've got to have it. I said let me tell you what's going to happen If we do a taste test in two weeks. There's going to be something we overlook, something that the other side is going to be able to pick upon. We understand that. But we go into that position and the guy goes after my taste test and there was something he picked apart. He wasn't right about this, but it had to do with the number of different types of people in the taste test. I said I didn't want too many students. I followed all the basic rules.
Final Advice and Conclusion
Speaker 3Well, my attorneys got back and said you know, we're not even going to go to court on this. We think you blew the thing. I didn't blow it, but I said we're going to find something they're going to attack and we had to be ready for that. They didn't pay me. Oh wow, they didn't pay me. And I said to myself you know you don't sue lawyers. I mean, they keep you tied up, they're paying nothing and we're paying money. And the second thing I was use it as a learning experience. I should not have done the case when I said you really can't do a perfect case in two weeks. I'll never do that. I'll never do that. I'll just tell them find someone else.
Speaker 2A learning experience and you know, every expert witness has had these sorts of uh, negative experiences, uh, anyone who's been doing it for a significant amount of time anyway, and I find that most expert witnesses, um, as you say, take it on the chin and turn it into a learning experience, and now our listeners can learn from your experience. Before we wrap up, do you have any last advice for expert witnesses and, in particular, newer expert witnesses?
Speaker 3Well, it's what I said in the very beginning, which is you can't take this stuff personally, I do know some people. I know one guy was an expert witness and he walked out of the deposition. He couldn't take it. I mean, he just couldn't take it. I know some of the beginning. People think they're 100% right. They can't imagine that someone could ever have a different opinion. But I think that the main thing that I had to struggle with in the beginning was understanding that these other attorneys don't hate you. It's their job. You have your job, they have their job. That's what I think was the most important thing.
Speaker 2Absolutely Sage advice. Dr Stanton, thank you so much for joining me here today at the Roundtable. It's my pleasure, and thank you to our listeners for joining me for another discussion at the Roundtable Cheers.
Speaker 1Thank you for listening to our podcast Discussions at Roundtable. Our show notes are available on our website, roundtablegroupcom. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts or your favorite listening apps.