The Expert Witness Dilemma (accounting)

The Expert Witness Dilemma

An expert refers to an individual that possess certain special experience, some skills or academic qualifications that make these individuals to be particularly in possession of knowledgeable skills in some field of interest. They provide their qualified opinions and ideas on matters that are within the area of expertise for the purpose of any court proceeding.

The reason why an Expert witness is needed is because it’s a requirement since opinion evidence is not admissible in any court proceedings, this makes Dr. Jonathan Strauss an expert witness since he possesses these skills and qualifications;

1. 1. He reviews and analysis all documents that are made available and are deemed relevant to this case of Jefferson County Commission.
   2. Dr. Jonathan Strauss writes and gives his qualified opinion that regards the most crucial aspects of this case that is at hand. Dr. work is not restricted to analyzing whether the county commission implemented any form of strategies that are aimed at preventing fraud as well as inappropriate recording and reporting of the contracts and warrants.
   3. Another justification for Dr. Jonathan Strauss role as an expert witness is because he has the skills and expertise to weigh the quality of the investigation that was carried out in the County Commission as well as whether the investigator who carried out the investigation possessed any adequate training as well as the skills that are paramount in conducting such a high voltage investigation.
   4. As an expert witness in this case, Dr. Jonathan Strauss is able to decide by determining the adequacy of the feedbacks that are emanating from the complaint by Jefferson County Commission management.
   5. Jonathan Strauss is also able to evaluate the experiences as well as the qualifications of the Jefferson County Commission trainers, their appropriateness to the case that is at hand as well as their understanding of the learning objectives as stated and the methodology that is used in carrying out the investigations in this case. He is also able to understand the frequency of training to the investigators, how the commission carries out management training that is employee specific and centered. Finally, Dr. Jonathan is able to determine and learn how both the seasoned and the new employees are incorporated in the commission’s training patterns.
   6. Jonathan Strauss is also at a position to assess the any form of adequacy in the various organizational policies of Jefferson County Commission that are related to any form of discrimination as well as harassment and violence and workplace in provision of basic services in the county. He also decides whether policies that are appropriate are disseminated and ensuring that the same policies are communicated clearly to the commission’s employees in a timely and most efficient manner.
   7. Dr. Jonathan also offers recommendations as an expert witness during unearthing of any additional documents that are crucial in reviewing and offer the required assistance to the attorneys in the development of questions to use in the case. Another justification for Dr. Jonathan as an expert witness is his ability to provide input to the attorneys as it is requested. He also possesses great writing skills hence enabling him to provide written statement of opinion, that is expert report for the use in the case. In some cases, the expert witness is required to testify at the depositions as well as court trials.

From the above justifications, Dr. Jonathan can be an expert witness in the case of Jefferson County Commission since being an expert witness, he is actually involved in activities that give rise to the court proceedings that give a clear evidence on the relevant facts that are surrounding the dispute. Though, in some other occurrences, the court might also require to hear from an individual who can give his/her opinion with authority concerning the technical issues that have advantages to the case of each party. Since Dr. Jonathan is an expert witness, he will assist the judge who may not have any know - how of how much the indentures of the County Commission are worth, their correct range as well as the valuation for County Commission particular property that may be attached to the debt. He will also give an expert opinion on how a particular specification on the patent should be interpreted or an expert opinion on what the standard of practice it is in any given County Commission. Therefore, it is in the wake of these types of issues that may require the court to receive an assistance from the expert witness so as to help the court it determining the Jefferson County Commission dispute.

Jefferson County Commission was marred with corruption where by virtue of being given a track record of the legislature, it proved so difficult to be positive about the outcome of the creditors’ settlement with the County. So as to minimize the interest rate of the county commission, cost that is incurred in restructuring of the debt and its settlement take into consideration and the assumption of the debt that will be issued with a sole moral obligation that is promised by the state. To fulfill this, the legislature is required to approve the said inclusion in addition to the establishment of a new public commission with the sole mandate to manage the sewer system. In relation to this provision, the Alabama delegation is torn apart over supporting the settlement. This has resulted to some local lawmakers to oppose the rate increases that they consider unfair.

Another issue with the Jefferson County Commission is the issue of threats from the bankruptcy since the commission used to defend the decision to file that was made by the council. It was after this threat to file that Jefferson County Commission also threatened to file that the County of Jefferson was able to initiate the progress in making negotiations with the Commission creditors. The above act is untrue as it is portrayed long before that Jefferson County has only been making threats to file for the insolvency for three years now but in reality, it never did. This has made creditors of Jefferson County Commission to literary wait so as to settle with the county since a number of other assignments that have a potential to have an impact on the finances of the County which they had to pay it out.

Another issue is lack of the County to intervene swiftly on the financial situation in the state of Alabama since the commission only resisted in offering any form of assistance to Jefferson County Commission over a couple of years. Despite the County having a multiple of legislative sessions being passed, the legislature of Alabama has failed to act on the newly introduced legislation so as to be of help to the county restructuring of both its debt as well as replacing revenues from the occupational tax that the County had previously lost. This was attributed to the fact that there was a problem within the Alabama legislature in which the lawmakers made references to the local delegation in order to make decisions that touches on the local matters. This has resulted to the fact that the legislature continuously proves to be a shortcoming in addressing this disfunction of the legislature thus making Jefferson County decisions to have a downward effect on all municipalities that comprises the state that have been paying the premiums with the main aim of borrowing some money in the bond market. As a result, market analysts have continued to warn the potential investors against making investments in Alabama Department.

In the year 2009, more issues befell the Jefferson County and some becoming much worse. This forced a local court to deny the County it’s both the occupational and also business license taxes. This decision was eventually appealed to and on the other hand the decision being upheld by the Alabama Supreme Court. The occupational and business license taxes were made up of one-third of the budget general fund of the County. This action made the county to go into a full austerity mode of shutting down the offices, and job losses. Instead, the Commission should not have taken this action since it is required by law that at any given time, the commission and other legislatures should make decisions that offer hopes to the residents of the county thus becoming their largest employer.

References.

Bochis, C., Pitt, R., & Johnson, P. (2008). Land Development Characteristics in Jefferson County, Alabama. Journal Of Water Management Modeling. doi: 10.14796/jwmm.r228-16

Fabozzi, F., & Feldstein, S. (2013). The handbook of municipal bonds. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Howell-Moroney, M., & Hall, J. (2011). Waste in the Sewer: The Collapse of Accountability and Transparency in Public Finance in Jefferson County, Alabama. Public Administration Review, 71(2), 232-242. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02334.x