S
SwornIn ← swornin.io
Litigation intelligence · One-time report

The Opposing-Expert Report: Their Expert's Court Record, Analyzed

By SwornIn · Informational research — not legal advice.

The other side just disclosed their expert. Before you draft a single deposition question, you should know how that expert's testimony has actually fared in court: where they've testified, how often their opinions were challenged, what happened, and on what stated grounds. That record exists — in published opinions across the public court record — but assembling it by hand takes hours of searching and reading.

The Opposing-Expert Report does it in minutes. Give us the expert's name (a specialty or jurisdiction hint helps). We search published opinions on CourtListener for cases where they appear as a testifying expert, analyze each one, and deliver a print-ready brief — with every claim cited to a source opinion you can click and verify.

What's inside

Testimony history
Every reviewed opinion where the expert appears as a retained or testifying expert: case, court, year, which side retained them, and what the court said — each linked to the source opinion.
Challenge record
A tally of how often their testimony was challenged in the reviewed opinions and the outcomes — admitted, limited, excluded, or unclear — computed deterministically from the rulings, not estimated.
Vulnerability themes
Recurring, record-based patterns in how courts have treated this expert's methodology — the stated grounds of rulings, not character commentary. Each theme cites its supporting cases.
Cross-examination angles
Three to six professionally-worded lines of inquiry grounded only in the cited public record — starting points for counsel, never assertions of wrongdoing.

Built on the public record — honestly

  • Name disambiguation is a feature. Same-name search hits (a party, an attorney, an expert in an unrelated field) are excluded from the analysis and listed with the reason, so you can check our judgment.
  • Every claim cites a source. Each finding links to the underlying opinion on CourtListener for verification against the primary record.
  • Thin records stay thin. If fewer than two usable opinions survive disambiguation, we tell you — with whatever partial findings exist — instead of padding a report. Your purchase is not consumed by an insufficient-record result.

Honest limitations

Published opinions are a fraction of an expert's career: most depositions, many trial rulings, and all confidential matters never enter the public database, and coverage is strongest in federal courts. A quiet report is not a clean bill of health, and a challenge count is not the expert's full record. Every report carries a data-confidence rating, a disambiguation note, and a "what this record does not show" section. This is informational research from public records — not legal advice — and should be verified against primary sources.

One report. One price.

$99 one-time · per expert researched
  • Full brief: testimony history, challenge record, vulnerability themes, cross-exam angles
  • Every claim cited and linked to the source opinion
  • Print-ready branded document + 30-day re-download window
  • Insufficient public record? The purchase isn't consumed.

We'll email you the moment the report goes live. No spam — occasional litigation-intelligence briefs. Unsubscribe anytime.

Researching your judge too? Pair this with the free judge lookup — how your judge tends to rule on expert admissibility, from the same public record. And for market context on what experts cost and how challenges break by discipline, see the 2026 State of Expert Witness Testimony report and Daubert by the Numbers.

© 2026 SwornIn LLC · Sources: public court records via CourtListener (Free Law Project). The Opposing-Expert Report is informational research from public records, is not legal advice, and should be verified against primary sources.