Login | March 13, 2026
Exploring how AI is impacting the way expert testimony is handled in litigation
SHERRY KARABIN
Published: March 13, 2026
As litigators know expert testimony plays a crucial role in trial proceedings, providing insight and analysis that can bolster or weaken attorney arguments, potentially making or breaking a case.
But as a Feb. 3 post on Above the Law (https://abovethelaw.com/2026/02/ai-and-expert-witnesses-not-replacement-but-a-strategic-imperative/) explains, artificial intelligence (AI) is now entering this space, with attorneys and experts utilizing AI to amplify insight and scrutiny.
The story is part of a series of articles by Sensei Enterprises Inc. President and Chief Executive Officer Michael C. Maschke and co-founders John W. Simek and attorney Sharon D. Nelson.
Based in Fairfax, Virginia, Sensei Enterprises offers managed IT support services, cybersecurity and digital forensic solutions to clients nationwide.
While the authors stress that AI systems won’t be replacing humans on the stand, they say the technology is being deployed to reshape how expert testimony is analyzed, prepared and challenged.
When used correctly, Maschke, Simek and Nelson say AI can offer a number of strategic advantages.
For example, they point to the technology’s ability to reduce the time involved in large-scale review.
They say AI can analyze extensive and complex data at a rate no human could reasonably accomplish, identifying internal inconsistencies, alternative explanations and conflicts with previous opinions that might otherwise go unnoticed. As a result, lawyers can forego countless hours on the review process and focus on interpretation, judgment and strategy.
AI is also being utilized to simulate adversarial questioning.
“By feeding an expert’s report and prior statements into a model configured to challenge assumptions and probe weaknesses, lawyers can pressure-test testimony before it ever reaches the courtroom,” the authors explain.
In addition, the tools can help translate complex technical analysis into language that judges and juries can better comprehend.
Though there are benefits, they caution users that AI also comes with risks such as hallucinations, stressing that it’s imperative for a human to verify every citation, dataset and conclusion.
The authors advise attorneys to clearly document how the tools were used in the preparation or review of expert testimony, adding experts should also receive guidance on how to avoid hallucinogenic content.
Maintaining transparency is also key, they say, adding that, “As courts become more familiar with AI, judges may expect disclosure when AI plays a meaningful role in expert analysis…
“At its best, AI turns overwhelming volumes of information into actionable insight,” the authors conclude. “At its worst, it turns fiction into fact. The difference is human oversight, and that responsibility still rests squarely with the lawyer.”