The outcome of civil litigation cases can have significant implications for the parties involved. When justice is done, the genuinely injured party receives appropriate recompense and the genuinely negligent party is found liable. When the civil matter involves personal injury, disability claims, or civil capacities (e.g, testamentary capacity or medical decision making), forensic neuropsychologists can and do provide valuable insights into the nature and severity of plaintiffs’ cognitive, emotional, and behavioral deficits. And where appropriate, the forensic neuropsychologist describes the nexus between the events or injuries in question and the cognitive, emotional and behavioral deficits observed. Forensic neuropsychologists also provide opinions regarding the presence or absence of feigned or malingered symptoms - often a critical concern in forensic contexts.  

​

These insights are based on careful observation, detailed review of records, objective evaluation of plaintiffs/claimants, and interview of collateral observers. Evaluations generally include the administration and interpretation of carefully selected tests used to measure cognitive and intellectual functioning (e.g., learning & memory, language, decision making), emotional dysfunction (e.g., anxiety, depression, PTSD), and behavioral dysregulation (e.g., impulsive or risk taking behavior). The tests selected for use in a forensic evaluation must meet the highest standards for reliability and validity and must hold up in the face of Daubert/Frye challenges.

​

Overall, neuropsychology can play an important role in civil litigation in ensuring that plaintiffs/claimants are able to access justice and receive fair compensation for injuries and other losses related to neurocognitive or emotional issues when they are genuinely impaired. It is equally important that defendants in civil matters are not found negligent or liable for plaintiff injuries that are exaggerated, feigned, malingered, or may have existed prior to the alleged injury or event.