If RI SC overturns lead verdict will state sue its own expert witnesses?

Times are not good for expert witnesses.  Not only are they being forced to reveal on the stand the compensation they're receiving.  Remember those $400 to $600 hourly fees by some of the expert witnesses in the Rhode Island lead paint public nuisance trials.  They can also be sued by the side who hires them.

As Teresa Baldas reports in THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL, "in recent years, a growing number of courts have permitted parties to sue their own experts for negligent testimony, holding that expert witnesses should not be immune from liability from their own clients." For example, Baldas presents the lawsuit by a California couple against a property-appraisal expert for allegedly not providing on the stand an accurate estimate of the cost to rebuild their home.  The expert appealed, claiming immunity.  The CA Supreme Court wouldn't accept the appeal.

So, there are all kinds of questions we might be wondering about if the RI Supreme Court overturns the verdict in the lead paint trial.  Will the plaintiff in that trial - i.e. the state of RI - consider suing some of its expert witnesses, if that's permitted in RI?  Witnesses such as historian David Rosner have figured prominently in the appeal briefs submitted by lead paint defendants Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries and Millennium Holdings.  Could the state allege negligence in any of that testimony?

The argument against immunity goes this way.  You are paying the experts big bucks to be an advocate for you.  If they don't properly represent you, then there could be grounds to make them accountable.  This, though, doesn't mean any party can sue just because they are unhappy with the experts' performance or the outcome of the trial.

Clearly, the lucrative field of serving as expert witnesses has taken on significant risk.