Engaging with Family Law Attorney, Russell Knight

We sit down with Russell Knight, a Chicago and Naples divorce attorney to unpack how experts get chosen, what courts really value, and the quiet ways reputation and rigor steer outcomes.

Russell breaks down the two pillars of expertise he relies on: financial analysts who trace income, valuation, and debt, and mental health professionals who assess parenting time and responsibilities. He explains the reality behind “court lists”, how the courthouse whisper network shapes expectations, and the specific questions attorneys ask before engagement: Are you accepted in this venue? Have you appeared before this judge? The conversation gets practical fast. Retain your expert, set firm delivery dates, and avoid late, stale reports that collapse under new facts.

If you’re an expert witness aiming to be credible, timely, and resilient under pressure, or a lawyer who needs reports judges can trust, this conversation is a field guide. Subscribe and share. 

Transcript

Meet Russell Knight

Noah Bolmer 0:00

Welcome to Engaging Experts. I'm your host, Snow Ballmer, and today I'm excited to welcome Russell Knight to the show. Mr. Knight is a divorce and family law attorney. He's authored over 750 articles on Illinois family law and has been quoted in numerous magazines and news programs. Mr. Knight holds a JD from the University of Illinois. Mr. Knight, thank you so much for joining me here today on Engaging Experts. Glad to be here. Thanks for having me. Let's jump into it. You've been a family law attorney for gosh 19 years now. Uh, do you frequently use experts in your practice?

Rusell Knight 0:37

I often use and abuse experts, depending on where I stand in relation to the expert's opinion. They are crucial in what I do. Family law is a mile wide and an inch deep. So we need somebody to get further than that one inch to get down to some brass tacks quite frequently.

Financial And Mental Health Experts

Noah Bolmer 0:55

Tell me a little bit about the types of expert witnesses that you use in your practice. What are you looking for?

Rusell Knight 1:00

Well, there are two types of expert witnesses broadly in family law. One is called a financial expert. It's generally an appointed, like when we say a forensic accountant, what we're really talking about is a generalized financial expert who will go through and determine how much someone really owns, how much someone really makes, how much someone really owes. Uh, those are generally accountants of some stripe. And then there are, in Illinois, we call them 60410s. They're really a mental health expert. It's like a step above guardian ad items and other people who make recommendations for children where they use actual expertise instead of just horse sense, which I think is all that gets applied by other people, to make recommendations about custody determinations and determinations of parenting time and parenting responsibilities.

Noah Bolmer 1:45

So when you are first making that initial phone call, you reach out to an expert witness. Tell me a little bit about that conversation. What are attorneys looking for? And also what should expert witnesses be looking for? Because it is, at the end of the day, a two-way vetting process.

Court Lists, Approval, And Daubert

Rusell Knight 2:00

Yeah, there's actually a bit of a three-way vetting process because what the initial uh, well, how do I want to say it? The initial bottleneck is usually whether the court itself approves that expert. Some you're you're entitled to bring in whoever you want, and you have to prove that they're in fact uh have an expert level of expertise. But in Illinois, we generally have something called a courts expert, which is easier to get in, and that court expert has to be on a list. Every county has different lists, judges have favorites within that list. The courts, the counties are also open to having new people. They definitely need people on a constant basis. So my first question is, are you on the list? My second question is, have you ever done this in front of this judge before? So the judge won't object to me appointing you. And uh my third question is more of what is your experience? What do you uh have do you have like any policies or without they don't show me their hand, but for the most part, the folks usually have a reputation. Uh the family law. It's I practice in the Daily Center. It is the world's largest single courthouse, it's a gigantic skyscraper in the middle of Chicago, and it's like being in high school, you see the same people every day. So everybody has a reputation, and you can ask anybody who's good for this or who's good for that, and people will usually say, Well, he's good for men, she's good, he's she's good for moms, or uh, this person will give you a low valuation, or this person will give you a high valuation, and uh we kind of rely on this whisper network. And if the whisper network doesn't work, if you're brand new to it, that's okay. Um, because a lot of times we want someone outside of the whisper network, because the if we believe the fix is in against our own client, then we want someone who's brand new and we'll be happy to, and the judges want someone who's brand new too, because the average age of an expert, I don't know how old these people are, but they don't look too young.

reputations And The Whisper Network

Noah Bolmer 4:03

Well, when you talk about these uh court lists, that's really interesting. Tell me a little bit more about that. Are there ever court court appointed experts in your field? That's rarely the case in the United States, but it does happen, or is this just a uh list maintained by the system to let you know that these are pre-vetted people that aren't going to get Dobert challenges?

Rusell Knight 4:25

Uh no, it's definitely a list because for court-appointed. The funny thing about it is that uh the Cook County court system, I think, is the biggest court system in the United States because in its wisdom, New York is divided up into five boroughs and Los Angeles, I think, has top ten districts. Chicago is a fiefdom of its own. It's just Chicago. Yeah, they keep everything under the ideas everyone's in the pent pissing out, no one's piss on the outside pissing in. So they have rules about who is supposed to be uh approved and who isn't. And so for Cook County, they have they have lists for the for some for some experts. I don't know if it's really an official list to be up for the financial ones, for the 60410, I think it's the same thing. And then some other counties do the same thing where they also have uh similar lists. I'm thinking of I'm really thinking of other people that are quasi-experts that are on lists, but so I don't think there really is an official list. I take that back, but we're using the same people constantly, and uh we then the judge, if it's a court-appointed expert, then the judge has to say, I approve of that in advance. If it's not a court-appointed expert, which is your right to bring in, then you have to do the Daubert test and go through all of that. And the judge is also like, you know, who is this joker? This person's on where that Russell paid to give me an opinion. Whereas Russell pays the court-appointed expert to give an opinion, but for some reason that gives it the uh the brass ring of authenticity.

Noah Bolmer 5:56

Have you been in those situations with court-appointed expert witnesses? Something I guess akin to uh believe it's a Rule 706 style appointment.

Court-Appointed Experts’ Weight

Rusell Knight 6:04

Well, the for the court-appointed experts that uh pursuant to our local statutes, the judges hold them in high regard because they do all the heavy lifting. Like a judge did not go to accounting school, and judges particularly don't care to get into the weeds on financial issues, and then for kid issues, like it's so sensitive. And for if an expert, a psychiatrist is saying, I talked to mom, I talked to dad, I talked to these kids, I verified and corroborated all the evidence that they alleged with teachers, with social workers, and everything. And so this is what my opinion is. You know, there, the judge's work is sort of done. The judge doesn't need to do the hard work of assessing the credibility of every single person. If someone does choose to challenge and says, like, I didn't say that at all, then the judge can weigh that versus the expert. And I will say that the experts are uh have an incredible amount of integrity. You cannot hire someone and know that what the result will be in advance. They really do does depend on the facts, and they may have preferences more towards uh a 50-50 split between parents, which doesn't reflect being pro-dad, even though that's what people say, or they may have preferences where they are skeptical of business owners' deductions, but that doesn't mean that the business owners' deductions are any more valid or invalid than they would be normally. It just means that that is the opinion of the expert. And if you're aware of the opinions in advance, then you have to figure out what the bases for those opinions are if you want to challenge them. Otherwise, you accept them wholeheartedly.

Noah Bolmer 7:39

Do you glean some of that in advance during the initial phone calls, or does that require some NDAs before you start figuring out what their actual opinion is going to be for a specific fact pattern?

Probing Bias And Preferences

Rusell Knight 7:52

I think it's very fair to say in the initial phone call, what are your experiences with uh, let's use the exact example. What do you have experiences for 50-50-50 divisions of parenting time? Because parenting time is really everything, the decision making, whatever. Um, and if they say, like, I if they they could tell me, like, I hardly ever recommend it because uh every case is dependent on um who the real primary parent is, and there's usually a primary parent. Sometimes that's true. Or a someone might say uh have very strong opinions about certain industries and how they are creative with their accounting and expenses, and they'll usually tell you as much. So I don't think uh I don't think experts hide the ball. You know what experts like being? They like being experts, they will let you know, they will let you know exactly how they feel about something.

Noah Bolmer 8:42

Absolutely. I've heard from a lot of experts that one of the things that they truly enjoy about their job is teaching. Do you find that attorneys such as yourself are receptive to being taught what it is that an expert is an expert in?

Retainers, Timing, And Costs

Rusell Knight 8:56

I would say that if we're students, we're extremely skeptical students. I literally have on my desk right here the Bible for us, John Zervopoulos, how to examine medical how to examine mental health experts. This is not meant to help the mental health expert. This is meant to tear the mental health expert apart. So if you are the easy part is to bring in an expert that you agree with and say, tell me everything you know. I want to hear all about it. How did you come up with this bait with this decision? What's the basis? Uh I need I goes, you're so smart, I'm so smart, the judge is so smart, I'm sure we're all on the same page. The real challenge is to say, this isn't really even a science, is it? You and the horse you rode in on, you're not really qualified to talk about this, are you? In fact, my bet my most my favorite thing was once I asked the guy, he's like, You're not very good at math, are you? And he said, Well, I wouldn't say that. And I said, But for an accountant? He says, Yeah, maybe.

Noah Bolmer 9:56

Let's talk a little bit about the expert witness perspective. During those initial phone calls, what should the expert witness be asking the attorney and what sorts of red flags should they be looking for on whether or not they want to accept an engagement?

Rusell Knight 10:11

Oh, good question. Um, well, the red the expert witnesses need to have a retainer. Judges, I mean j lawyers understand how retainers work, and expert witnesses should be generous with that. If the person wants not just a report that's honest and forthright and based on science, if they want a report that is thorough, that is therefore unimpeachable, and they want it soon so that it's not stale, they need to pay for that. And so the experts should feel very comfortable saying this is what this costs to get a report to you by X date. And if that is done, whether the report is good or bad for the person, they can't say that they didn't get their end of the bargain. So that is, I think, what uh experts need to do. Our problem's not really the result of the report, our problem is usually that the report is late. And then if the report is late, the facts are stale. And then even if it's the report agrees with you, you can't really do anything with it because your other side is saying, well, if you didn't you know that these facts have changed, and if you knew about these facts having changed, would your opinion be the same? No expert's gonna say no, my opinion was gonna stay the same no matter what. It's not gonna happen.

Noah Bolmer 11:20

One of the things that experts have uh mentioned a lot during these shows is that often they feel that they haven't been given enough time. Uh, you know, they're a lot of last-minute engagements. They might not have enough time to read all of the relevant case materials and properly develop a report and edit it and you know the entire process. Is that part of the reason that they might be turning in reports late sometimes, or is that something else?

Confidentiality And Controlled Experts

Rusell Knight 11:48

I think this is purely speculation, but I think the expert is his own breed that and opining on things, uh for some reason it feels better if the expert is stewed on it. So there's a nature of the of being an expert to be judicious with their time um and not truly rush something, which you know for the on balance is probably better than to have a rushed report. So I don't fault them, but the world goes on. So, experts, please prepare your reports on a prompt basis.

Noah Bolmer 12:24

Let's talk a little bit about communication and setting up an engagement. How do you set up confidentiality and privilege? How do experts know the manner in which they should be presenting information to you? Should they be making a phone call? Should they be talking? Should they be putting it down in writing? Is this discoverable? Is it not? How do you go about communicating that with a newer expert witness?

Rusell Knight 12:48

That's a great. I've got a I write all these articles. That's how I get most of my business and how I become a better lawyer. And I specifically have an article about controlled witnesses and how the difference between that and it and an independent witness and how the information a controlled witness has is attorney client confidentiality. So tell me anything if you're controlled. I've it's my job to not squeal on you or to tell or to tell you what you can say or what you can't say um within reason. And for independent experts, it's uh everything's discoverable, so you might be a little more careful with what you say to the independent expert, but I don't think that means that you need to be careful with what the independent expert says to you, uh, because they're simply doing their job and what they're saying to you is discoverable. But isn't that the point?

Noah Bolmer 13:41

Earlier you you were talking about making sure that you get your reports and work product in on time. How do you set those expectations at the beginning of an engagement? During before they sign, before they sign the letter, before you both sign the contract, the engagement letter, uh, how do you set those expectations up so that both parties are fully aware of what the time commitment is likely to be?

Rusell Knight 14:04

Yeah, there's quite court orders are issued by the courts saying when reports have to be due exchanged, when rebuttal witnesses have to be hired and disclosed. And so we typically that's usually enough. Um, in the meantime, there'll be a back and forth and there's gonna be a constant sort of push, like when are we gonna see that report? When are we gonna know more about this? Or usually done very politely by do you need more information? What else can we do for you? We're very once the once the the signature is signed and the we've paid you, we're kind of beholden to the expert because we need that report and we need you to like us and like our client, and so we're gonna be as sweet as pie until that happens. And we're gonna stay sweet because we need your opinion to be favorable.

Noah Bolmer 14:51

Are there any significant differences for an expert witness in terms of preparing a rebuttal report uh versus an initial report?

Rusell Knight 15:00

You don't know whether the experts know each other, whether they are know anything about each other, whether how much of their field could be reliably labeled as mumbo jumbo, even by another expert, which is an expert will really tell you what's not what's real and what's not about somebody else's report, not about their own. And then you just so rebuttal reports or other products, again, you just have to keep saying, like, is there anything else you need? Uh, and they will tell you. And if you're if you're helping them do the work, don't be surprised if the work looks good on you.

Deposition Strategy And Traps

Noah Bolmer 15:35

Let's talk a little bit about preparation. Uh, experts find themselves in often contentious situations like depositions and perhaps cross-examination on occasion, although often these things are going to settlements these days in a lot of fields. How do you like to prepare your expert witnesses, get them ready to be in some of these really tense situations? And how do you you yourself prepare for it?

Rusell Knight 16:00

You can give so depositions don't work like a cross-examination where it's like, isn't it true that you do this is all mumbo jumbo and you're a quack and you have no basis to say that? Depositions are very they we all use something called the funnel technique where we talk about isn't it true? Like the sky's blue today, and then isn't it true that there was a one puffy cloud? And then you get further onto it, but you packed your an umbrella yesterday, didn't you? Yeah, and he goes, Do you always pack an umbrella? No. Do you also pack a lunch too? You get further down, like you packed an umbrella because even though the sky was blue and there's a fluffy cloud, and you packed your lunch, you knew on that date that it would later rain, and you knew that because your expertise told you that. Well, if your expertise told you that, then why didn't you do this? It ends up being a long road where you have to expect to get caught in your previous words that you've given. Lawyers don't come out of nowhere and say, Isn't it true you don't know anything? They prove you that you don't know anything through a very slow process. And so I my best advice to the expert is do not fall in love with the person who's deposing you. They are not there to help you, they are there to actively hurt you. And so you should keep your answers short or keep your answers extremely long and vague. So it's tough to pin you on something that you will because at another later date they'll be like, don't you remember being in my office and I asked us you to swear under oath, and you said this, and that can be taken completely out of context. Uh so I've I don't know how much preparation is really the responsibility of a lawyer so much as to create it educate the expert in the fact that how a deposition works. A deposit there's very few, there's never a show about a deposition. Depositions happen, and people have a good idea what happens in trial, but they have a very poor idea of what happens in a deposition.

Inside An Expert Deposition

Noah Bolmer 17:57

Let me ask you let me interrupt you briefly. Why don't you walk me through a deposition for an expert witness who's never done one before? Where does it take place? What can they expect? Tell me about a deposition.

Exhibits, Records, And Subpoenas

Rusell Knight 18:08

It will happen at a Zoom typically nowadays, before it used to happen in an office, and people would sit and be comfortable, and then they'd say, like, okay, I'm gonna introduce myself. I'm Russell Knight. I'm representing Mr. X. You've been hired by uh Mr. Smeigle, and you have been you're you understand that Mr. Smigle is the attorney for Mr. Jones, and then Mr. Jones has in fact been the one that paid your fee. And I want to walk you through what you know and what you don't. And I also understand, and you understand, that you're a controlled expert, and you're going to uh your Mr. Smeigel might say uh privilege at any point. And if he does, I'm gonna give you permission to stop, okay? Because that must mean that it must be something that's attorney client privilege, and I'm not allowed to ask about that. Beyond that, though, sir, I'd like to educate you and say that you any other questions you have to I have cannot be objected to. Things you've seen in the movies like relevance, hearsay, what have you, those are not valid objections in an deposition. And your attorney, the attorney who's representing your employer, Mr. Spigel, he knows that. And so I don't expect him to object that way. So I'm gonna go through a series of questions to learn a little bit more about you, about your practice, and then finally about the conclusions you came to and the basis for those conclusions. If at any time I'm confusing you, you can ask me to restate the question. If you elaborate and I don't like the elaboration, I may ask you to wrap it up. We only have so much time here. So, very politely, do you need to if you need to get a glass of water, go to the bathroom, let me know. But other than that, I'd like to begin. And then the person's going to come in. Remember, this person is your enemy. They are there to trap you, and they're gonna ask you all these. Super broad questions. And the idea is that the super broad questions follow a second set of not so broad questions, and then a third set of questions that are based on the first set, two sets, and they're going to slowly put you into a corner saying, Well, isn't it true that based on the fact that you told me this and then you told me that, your conclusion couldn't be what's in your report? Well, then explain, and then you can say you will get the opportunity to explain yourself away. Because on rebuttal in court, they will allow you to explain yourself away. And so he'll explain away. And that's how they'll be ready for your counter-explanation. And that's okay. You can let them know in advance. It's not going to be a problem. But that's that's sort of how I would coach an expert witness.

Noah Bolmer 20:47

Absolutely. And who are the parties typically at a deposition?

Rusell Knight 20:52

Well, for me in my field, they are usually a spouse and another spouse. And then there's usually one attorney that's conducting the deposition. Sometimes there'll be another attorney watching the deposition, um, because it's easier to watch a deposition and follow up, follow up on some emails than to read the whole thing later. And then there'll be other party and the the other spouse, an attorney, and there's usually one attorney just defending the deposition who's only giving the objection of privilege or uh form of the question. And because there's not really a lot to do. It's the easiest thing to do is to defend one.

Noah Bolmer 21:28

Absolutely. In in your field, do they use deposition designations where lawyers will kind of identify and mark specific portions of a transcript, and that becomes part of the discovery, and that's what we're gonna we're gonna talk about, these portions, and everybody knows what's coming. Could you tell me a little bit about that process? Sure.

Venue Nuances In Family Law

Rusell Knight 21:48

Well, in the middle of a deposition, you can say, at this time, I'm gonna be forwarding you a copy of your a document. Do you recognize this? And it's like, oh, that was my report. All right, I'm gonna direct you first to the last page where you signed it. And uh, I noticed you signed it under perjury, that means that everything you report is true and the bases are true. Oh, yeah, that's true. All right, I'm gonna direct your attention to page three where you said this, this, and this. And then at the end, you can make it as part of the record of the deposition, or alternatively, the others when you're coming in, and if I if I'm the depot the the person deposing, that's then I and you have said document that I want to see, I can ask for it to be a subpoena deuces teacum, which means because in the old days, like you'd actually have to appear everywhere and people didn't send stuff via mail, they would like, I all drop it off at your office, you know, like in the madmen days. And so people would come to court, not come to court, but come to the office and be like, All right, I brought in all these documents for you. Here you go. And then you're like, All right, let's go through the documents together. What am I looking at here? Help me out talking, and you got to think we talked about attorney-client privilege. This is the only time that the other lawyer, the opposite lawyer, has the ability to talk to someone on the other side directly, not their attorney. So, lawyers, me specifically, love doing that because we want to show you what we're really made of and what you're getting ready for at trial.

Noah Bolmer 23:12

Let's shift gears for a moment. Let's talk about venue a little bit. So, uh, obviously there's different subject matter. There's all kinds of torts and criminal and whatnot, but then there's also local, state, federal, other countries, and different types of courts. What are some of the venues you've worked in and how does that impact expert witnesses? Is there anything that they need to know when going into a completely new venue or subject matter?

Discrediting Opposing Experts

Rusell Knight 23:40

Um, well, I'm only do family law, and I only do it in Illinois, and in my little corner of Southwest Florida, where I have a second office in Naples, Florida. Um, the so for when it comes to venue, we're all governed by the same rules of evidence that are based off the federal rules. Um, so I don't think it matters, especially um, you know, in family law to get a Daubert challenge or fry challenge, I I have to look up to see, like it's so rare, it just doesn't happen. Like if someone has a CPA, they're not gonna come up with a creative new way to determine what a person's income is. Like it's just is not an issue the way like determining you know how a crash happened or something. So there's less in family law, um, there's less experting going on, and there's more of letting your personality shine. And especially if there's kid issues, the expert is expected to be like everybody else and say, these are the best interests of the children, this is what we have to do to further these best interests. Thank you very much. And we all applaud at everyone's magnanime magnanimity of how they always put the kid first. So you the expert better get on the train and figure out how to be so selfless to make that happen.

Noah Bolmer 24:59

Do you have any tent poll cases that you can discuss where an expert witness either impacted it, changed your mind about something to do with expert witnesses, or reinforced some practice that you have vis-a-vis expert witnesses?

Building Strong Attorney–Expert Ties

Rusell Knight 25:15

The what an it comes out of an expert witness's mouth is so unbelievably predictable that I would say no. My job as the attorney is not so much to make my expert witness shine because you get it on the record, and the judge is like, Well, this is expert evidence is evidence, and it's the only expert we have, so it must be more valuable than your argument. So the judge can't ignore that and will be appealed if they do ignore it. So your real job is to discredit the expert, the other expert. So then the judge weighs your credibility of your expert, no matter how boring they are, higher than the other expert. So you're uh an expert's job is not to be likable, it is to be an expert, an unimpeachable expert. And that is the strength of a truly good expert. You have your opinion, and your opinion cannot be second-guessed by some joker who has went to law school because he couldn't go to medical school, and so don't you shouldn't take any degree from him.

Noah Bolmer 26:25

Let's talk a little bit generally about uh getting off on the right foot, getting started. What makes for a great expert attorney relationship? How do you get off on the right foot? How do you maintain that momentum? And how do you just in general create an environment where there is a solid, effective, and efficient engagement?

Rusell Knight 26:45

The lawyer should be paying the expert's bills on time and immediately at request. We're not here for fun. There's the expert is not there, is not a true believer. The expert has an opinion. Um, so that is the lawyer's duty to the expert, and vice versa. A lawyer's job is to synthesize and communicate information. If you, as an expert, are good at synthesizing and communicating information, then you've eliminated a big chunk of the lawyer's job, and he can focus on other stuff and he'll be very, very happy. Um, and for the most part, the lawyer does not understand what you're the heck you're talking about. So do the job of a lawyer, which is the communication, the synthesizing, and the you know, breaking it down. Do that job for them because the lawyer, truth be told, may not be capable of doing that. That is all lawyers are not created equal. That's why there's famous ones.

Getting Paid Without Drama

Noah Bolmer 27:44

One of the things that I've heard speaking of billing from expert witnesses is that occasionally, not super often, but occasionally, there's a situation where they've done their part, but they end up either not getting paid or getting paid very late because their payment is contingent on the end client paying the attorney. What do you advise? Uh, how do you advise expert witnesses in those situations? And what precautions can expert witnesses take to avoid those situations?

Final Advice And Using AI

Rusell Knight 28:12

Expert witnesses need to be aware that those conditions where the lawyer only gets paid at the end are exclusively, in my, as far as I know, for like uh personal injury matters. Family law. It is illegal to do anything on contingency. That lawyer should not be hiring you if they aren't directing their client to pay you directly. Do not rely on a lawyer's promise. Lawyers in family law are brutal for becoming true believers in their clients' cases, which means they're not getting paid, and like most likely, you're not getting paid. Don't accept later for an answer. You're gonna work hard. You deserve to get paid up front.

Noah Bolmer 28:50

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

Rusell Knight 28:56

Yeah, you don't use m-dashes. We all think you're using ChatGPT.

Noah Bolmer 29:00

You know, actually, I am I'm I'm afraid I I am gonna ask you a follow-up since you brought it up. What do you think about what do you think about the use of AI for both attorneys and for expert witnesses?

Rusell Knight 29:12

It's a great question. I think you should steer away from it as much as possible. But your report, say draft a cross-examination of my report based on my report, what hard questions would you ask me about this? That's what the other lawyer is gonna do. So why not know those questions in advance? You think ChatGPT is gonna give him a different answer than he's gonna give you? Not a chance.

Closing Thanks

Noah Bolmer 29:33

Fair enough. Mr. Knight, thank you so much for joining me here today. Of course. Thank you for having me. And thank you as always to our listeners for joining us for another edition of Engaging Experts. Cheers.