Engaging with Aviation Safety Expert, John Cox

In this episode…

Our guest, Captain John Cox, is the CEO of Safety Operating Systems, a full-service aviation consulting firm. He is the recipient of the FAA’s Master Pilot Award, an analyst for numerous news media organizations, and a published author. Captain Cox holds an MBA in Aviation Management from Daniel Webster College. 

It’s important to know what your area of specialty is within your field, according to Captain Cox. Even if you have broad knowledge across many related areas, it’s best to take cases that are squarely within the bounds of your experience and expertise. 

Check out the whole episode for our discussion on keeping your billing rates simple, two-way communication, and getting feedback after your engagement ends.

Transcript

Introduction to Captain John Cox

Speaker 1 0:01

This episode is brought to you by Roundtable Group, the experts on experts. We've been connecting attorneys with experts for over 30 years.

Speaker 2 0:09

Find out more at roundtablegroupcom.

Speaker 1 0:15

Welcome to Engaging Experts. I'm your host, Noah Balmer, and today I'm excited to welcome Captain John Cox to the show. Now, Captain Cox is the CEO of Safety Operating Systems. It's a full-service aviation consulting firm. He's the recipient of the FAA's Master Pilot Award, an analyst for numerous news media organizations and a published author. Captain Cox holds an MBA in aviation management from Daniel Webster College. Captain Cox, thank you so much for joining me here today on Engaging.

Speaker 2 0:44

Experts, my pleasure. Thanks for the invitation.

Speaker 1 0:48

Of course. So you've been a pilot for many decades. What first got you involved in expert witnessing?

Speaker 2 0:56

I had been doing a lot of aviation safety work in my last years with the airline and when I left the airline in 2005, it was sort of a natural progression and I had some friends that were doing some legal expert work, so it was sort of a natural progression as we founded safety operating systems that one of the things we would make available is the legal expert work.

Journey into Expert Witnessing

Speaker 1 1:22

Did you get kind of a call out of the blue for expert work or were you specifically advertising? Hey, we do expert witnessing work.

Speaker 2 1:31

A little bit of both. I had been involved in some aircraft accident investigation so I had been in the legal system being deposed, being a witness and being involved in it. So I knew some of the attorneys and then they turned around and were comfortable with me and so it was they asked me. But on the other hand I was also putting out on the web page that that was a service we offered.

Speaker 1 1:59

Let's talk a little bit about initial phone calls. So you get a call from somebody they want to engage you, or one of the other people who work at your company, as an expert witness. What are the sorts of questions that they're likely to pose to you and what are the ones that you ask them, because it is a two-way?

Speaker 2 2:17

vetting process. If you are going to be an effective expert, you have to know what cases to turn down. That's as important as what cases to take. The first thing is I generally will let the attorney run the narrative of what the case is about. Oftentimes they'll just try to read the complaint, and I want something more than that so that I kind of understand what the issues of the case really are and whether I think that the case is, that it has merit.

Case Selection and Initial Consultations

Speaker 2 2:55

There are some cases that you don't. You feel like this is a pretty far stretch and I don't really want to be associated with it. So you know, and they're looking. I get this question is this something you can do? So you have to know your own limitations as well and know when to say nope. This is if this is far too deep in the meteorology for a pilot. You need a meteorologist. So you have to be able to make those determinations in that initial phone call. Any other red flags, ones that you look at the case and go. Are you kidding me? I had one. That was they were trying to basically sue the government, saying the FAA was not doing the right kind of job, and I'm like are you kidding me? No thanks. Have a nice life and you need to move on.

Speaker 1 3:51

When you were talking about getting enough information to make a determination on whether or not you should turn down a case. Do you typically get that amount of information during the initial phone call, or do you end up having to sign an NBA and get a little bit more documentation sometimes?

Speaker 2 4:09

I've seen it go both ways. What they will typically do is they'll send you the complaint because that's public record, or they'll talk about the complaint and is this something you're interested in Then? If yes, then it moves on from there and oftentimes there's an NDA involved or a letter of retainment, in which case you know then that they're I'm legally bound once I'm retained by them, but in turn they pay me a retainer. So you know so that process. Then you'll generally get a lot more information that they'll send you based on the evidence that they have so far.

Speaker 1 4:52

Is that the point at which a consultation becomes a billable occurrence? Once you have signed something, is it free up until that point?

Speaker 2 5:02

It's free up until we agree that I will take the case and that they want me to take the case, in other words, that I am retained. At that point, the first thing for me is there's a retainer fee and I expect that to be paid, and then we'll move forward from there, and all of that time is billable.

Speaker 1 5:23

Any other contract terms that you like to insert besides a non-refundable retainer? Do you also do project rates? Do you do hourly rates? Do you change your rates for travel? What's your billing schedule?

Billing Practices and Client Relationships

Speaker 2 5:37

The billing schedule is it's an hourly rate and I really try to keep it simple. I mean, I know there are a lot of consultants that it's one rate if you're testifying, it's one rate if you're doing research, right. For a variety of reasons, I've always kept it at a single rate. Intercontinental travel, as business class is required, and that if travel days are typically one half day, which is typically an eight hour day, so you know it's a four hour day for travel and then, generally speaking, it's just what that. I have an Excel sheet and you know, whatever time I start reading documents or being on phone calls, the clock starts and it goes from there.

Speaker 1 6:26

You were talking about how important it is to occasionally turn down a potential engagement. Do you turn down a significant number of potential engagements?

Speaker 2 6:37

I wouldn't say a significant number. I turn down a few and then sometimes I'll be asked about a case, particularly if it's a plaintiff that they think there's a case there and will go through some period of time where it's like this isn't going to work and at that point I may step back from the case. And I've had a couple of plaintiffs that they were at them and then they wanted the retainer back and the retainer's nonrefundable, and so you know there was some heated discussion back and forth about that. But you know, as I tell them, the evidence leads you where it leads you, and that's you have to go down and look at it that way. You have to go down that road.

Speaker 1 7:23

You talk about. You know potential plaintiffs potentially engaging you. Do you find that the split is fairly even between plaintiffs and defendants?

Speaker 2 7:32

I'm a little bit heavier on defense, but I do both so and I'll look at either one. It's the merit and quality of the case to me.

Speaker 1 7:43

Do you worry about getting impeached on the stand? Oh hey, this guy's a hired gun. He only works for this side or only works for the other side? Do you actively manage that, or is it something that just kind of works out that way that you're working about 50-50 or so?

Speaker 2 7:55

I don't really actively manage it and I've had that question. Well, you do more defense work, so you've got a bias or a predisposition toward defense and I can generally take that argument down pretty quickly with just the number of years I've been doing this and the caseload which I provide to them. And you see that I've been on both sides of it. And you know, generally when I go back I look at the merit of the case, of it. And you know, generally when I go back I look at the merit of the case, not necessarily which side it's on. That pretty well disarms them. You know I've only had one attorney that really came after me and he ended up losing that case which was kind of poetic justice.

Speaker 1 8:41

You have certainly been at it for a while. What has changed throughout your career as an expert witness? Expectations, logistics you know I know a lot of people are zooming in these days. What are some of the things that you've seen change over the years?

Evolution of Expert Testimony Post-Pandemic

Speaker 2 8:55

Probably the first thing is the variety of the different formats and ways that reports have to be submitted to the court. It's as though each court has its own way of doing things, whether it's federal court, state court, whatever and that has sort of changed over the years. It's one of the questions I ask early on is what is it you want me to do? Do you want me to write a report? In some cases the answer is yes, in other cases it's no. We'll do that at a later point. Downstream, probably the biggest single change was post-pandemic or during the pandemic was the live depositions being more and more either Zoom or Teams or some other medium, so that I do a lot less in-person depositions than live.

Speaker 1 9:51

Do you prefer not having to travel and being able to do that from your home or from a workspace, or do you prefer actually being there in person?

Speaker 2 9:59

It really doesn't matter to me. I'm glad to go. You know, do that either way. I think you get a better seal for the attorneys in person. Just you know body language and just being around people. But it's not something either way is fine.

Speaker 1 10:19

Do you find that there are differences in terms of demeanor or like connecting with the jury making eye contact by looking at the camera? Are there any other considerations for telepresence or is it truly pretty much?

Speaker 2 10:30

the same thing With telepresence. You know you try to look directly at the camera, you try to answer questions effectively and in sound bites that come across easy In person. It's a little bit more of a personal dialogue between you and the attorney and you also. You can read a little bit of body language more body language from the attorney in person than you can via a platform.

Speaker 1 11:07

Sure, do you tend to use demonstratives in your work Charts, graphs, models, things of that nature?

Speaker 2 11:15

Not a whole lot. Oftentimes we'll get into research where there might be graphs or something and in the reports I may end up taking screenshotting something out of that and say, okay, as this graph shows you, there was a X percentage decrease over this period of time, but that it's more in the underpinning of opinion with fact and evidence to show how you arrived at the opinion.

Maintaining Composure During Cross-Examination

Speaker 1 11:48

You know you had mentioned about one particular instance in which attorney was kind of ruthless about trying to impeach you on working for the defense. Too often, Intense situations how do you keep your calm? How do you keep your cool? For instance, do you have a pre-trial routine or a pre-deposition routine that gets you ready for the day, gets you in the right headspace? Do you like to have some coffee or make sure you have a full meal or fast? What's your pre-trial routine and how do you keep it together during tense moments on the stand?

Speaker 2 12:19

One of the things I've learned after doing a lot of public speaking over the years I tend to do better with fuel. Consequently, I'm going to have a good breakfast in the morning just to be had the fuel to burn during that the going in. I try to answer the original questions with a respectful demeanor and I will maintain that. But I can be respectful and absolutely challenge an attorney and never raise a voice. I've had one particular attorney pretty well jumping up and down and making some pretty good accusations and my voice inflections never changed and he didn't do real well. We got a summary judgment against him.

Speaker 1 13:13

Are there any cases that come to mind? That were the pivotal ones, the ones that either change something about the way that you go about expert witnessing or reinforce something that you are already doing as an expert witness.

Speaker 2 13:26

Very early on. I was involved in a case after an aircraft accident, very high profile case, and there was a lot of attorneys both on the plaintiff side and the defense side, both on the plaintiff's side and the defense side. So my deposition was multiple days and it was quite an arduous experience After that because that was very early on, it was actually before I got the company started. After that you sort of it ain't going to get any worse. So you know you go in with that attitude of okay, you know, take your best shot and I try real carefully to underpin the opinions that I publish well with good citations. So if you go right there, as it says in the report and I'm going to, you know that's where I'm going to start pushing the attorneys back into a corner.

Speaker 2 14:36

As somebody who is published, do you ever worry that you said something 40 years ago that you might have changed your mind on, or that facts have changed, or just the times have changed, and getting impeached on that sort of thing? I've had that come up a couple of times where it says you know you said this, particularly in a speech or a presentation. So doesn't that mean that what you say in your report is in fact wrong. And no, because look at the context and what I'll do is put it in context timeline and context. And so I've had that come up once or twice and I'm very open with what you know, the depositions I've given and the legal work that I've done. I'm very open with the attorneys about it and if you Google my name, the presentations and the TVs and work all comes up. So it's pretty apparent. But I hadn't had a lot of problems with that, just a few.

Speaker 1 15:28

Aviation is a very broad area. It is subject to numerous laws, both at the federal, state and local levels. How do you stay an expert in your field? I noticed that you have a million certifications, so you're definitely doing something to keep up with it. But what is it like, in such a broad and dynamic field, not just being an expert, but remaining one?

Speaker 2 15:52

The area. I think the most important part of that is to know where your area of specialty is going to be. Aviation safety, accident investigation, flight operations I'm good with those. I can do high level maintenance because I'm an accredited maintenance auditor and some things like that. I have more fixed wing time than rotor wing time and I have done helicopter work. But I'm not going to come in and say that I'm an expert on flying helicopters. I'm an expert on evaluating helicopter operations, and so you have to know where those lines of experience and expertise really are at different levels.

Speaker 1 16:42

Have you worked both in criminal and tort? What are some of the different venues you've worked at and how, as an expert witness, is it different working in those venues I've?

Speaker 2 16:48

worked both federal and in multiple states. I haven't worked criminal. I came close on one case, but it went away. But the state laws are very different than federal and the whole process is different. Do you want to file a report? Do you not want to file a report? Um, I like to interview, um, uh, witnesses, so myself. Sometimes that's doable, and in other cases the courts don't want experts to do that. So each one of them and I'll let the attorney guide me on that I'll put it out Okay, this will help our case in this way and list those things out, and it's like nope, we can't do that. All right, fine, Then we'll find another way to do it. But I'm not a lawyer. I don't claim to be a lawyer. I let the legal expertise reside with them and obviously I take their guidance about how best to acquire the evidence necessary to make an opinion.

Speaker 1 17:52

Are engaging attorneys typically pretty good about providing that guidance without prompting, or do you have to take a proactive approach and say, hey, I haven't worked in this venue before. I'm not sure what a report looks like. Can you give me some guidance on that?

Speaker 2 18:07

I will typically put it in a format and with as a draft and I'll send it to them as a draft and say okay, if you want to reformat this in a different way, that's fine. Over the years I've built up a number of different formats depending on whether it's a federal case or a state case or the complexity of the case. Sometimes reports really don't need to be extensive. In other very complex cases, you're talking about a small book.

Speaker 1 18:39

Shifting gears. What, in general, makes for a positive expert-attorney relationship? How do you get off on the right foot and what are the things that both parties should be doing to maintain that quality, effective, efficient expert-attorney relationship?

Speaker 2 18:58

Be a good listener and that works on both sides If you're talking all the time and you're not really listening and it's a one-sided conversation. So, as an expert, I want to hear how they're trying to put the case together and if I can get an opinion that helps that, then great. If not, then let's talk about what I can do. But it needs to be a two-way conversation. Two-way conversation and if I'm asking for additional evidence that they need to gain through additional discovery requests, here's why. Here's where I'm trying to go with it. So I try to be very open with the. Once I have the framework in my head about where the opinion's likely to go, where the report's likely to go, then it's what evidence do we need to underpin it? And I'll put all that out in discussions with the attorney. This is why I'm asking for this. This is what I'm thinking that we need to make sure that this is acknowledged industry best practice or that this is consistent with a federal regulation, anything like that. But it's open communication and good listening.

Speaker 1 20:22

Expert witnesses are just one part of a larger trial team and in some cases a quite large of a trial team ranging from paralegals to assistants, to other expert witnesses and a group trial team and in some cases a quite large of a trial team ranging from paralegals to assistants to other expert witnesses in a group of attorneys. When you are working in a larger trial group or trial team, to what extent do you interact with the other members or do you as or is it pretty much just, you know, a dialogue between you and the main attorney and then the other parts are kind of independent?

Speaker 2 20:53

That can vary depending on the case. One of the things you have to realize as an expert they only want you to have a given amount of information. You're not going to see the big picture and you may be curious about it and it can be frustrating because you don't know what you don't know. But what you've been asked to do is to take evidence that has been supplied to you, evaluate it and provide an opinion. And you know I've had cases where I never knew that the case was settled or didn't. I just quit hearing from the attorneys. They paid the invoices and I never heard anything.

Speaker 2 21:32

One way or the other, that doesn't generally happen. Usually there'll be a okay, this one's settled or we're going to go to trial. The last one that went to trial was on the West Coast and so I flew out there. We did that and I had no idea. The trial went on for several more days and finally they called and said oh, by the way, we won. You know that was good, I was glad to hear it, but you do live in a bit of an isolation Then. That's by design by the attorneys and you have to recognize that.

Speaker 1 22:08

When it winds up? Do you prefer when an attorney lets you know what happened and perhaps give you a few pointers or let you know what they thought of your performance, or are you just ready to move on to the next thing?

Speaker 2 22:19

No, I always want the feedback, always want the feedback. That's a continuous improvement. And I ask the attorneys at the end every time is there anything I could have done better for you? And so no, I want that from the very first phone call to the last one, that open dialogue and exchange of information. I really do everything I can to make that happen.

Final Advice for Experts and Attorneys

Speaker 1 22:44

Before we wrap up, do you have any last advice for expert witnesses or attorneys working with expert witnesses?

Speaker 2 22:50

about providing high quality work, that you need to make sure that you're not overloading yourself when those multiple cases roll in. Two is do the high quality work you know, give them, give the attorneys, a hundred percent and if you don't know something, tell them that you don't need to be an expert in everything. There's areas that each of us don't know nearly as well as we might like, but be open about what you do, know where your expertise is and what you don't know. For the attorneys, I think I would say listen, listen to your experts, give them data, help them, help you so, but it maintain that open dialogue that will serve you, serve both parties, better than just about anything else.

Speaker 1 24:04

Sage advice. Captain Cox, thank you so much for joining me here today, my pleasure. Vice Captain Cox, thank you so much for joining me here today, my pleasure. And thank you, as always, to our listeners, for joining us for another edition of Engaging Experts.

Speaker 2 24:16

Cheers.

Speaker 1 24:16

Thank you for listening to our podcast Engaging Experts. Our show notes are available on our website roundtablegroupcom.