As trial graphics become standard in modern litigation, attorneys often ask the same question:
“Will this be admissible in court?”
At Multus Medical, our medical animations are built directly from patient-specific data and reviewed by medical experts. Because of this strict accuracy standard, our clients have never experienced an admissibility issue with a Multus Medical graphic.
Here’s what matters most when it comes to admissibility:
1. Accuracy Is Everything
Courts require demonstratives to fairly and accurately reflect the underlying evidence.
Animations should align with:
• Imaging
• Operative reports
• Expert opinions
When an expert can testify that the graphic is a “fair and accurate representation,” admissibility becomes straightforward.
2. Relevance to the Case
Under Rules 401 and 402, visuals must help the jury understand a key fact—such as the mechanism of injury, surgical steps, or hardware placement.
If it clarifies, it’s generally admissible.
3. Avoiding Prejudice (Rule 403)
Courts may exclude visuals that are overly dramatic or misleading.
This is why Multus Medical focuses on clarity, a major reason our graphics consistently withstand scrutiny.
4. Expert Sponsorship Matters
Most jurisdictions require expert validation.
When the treating physician or retained expert stands behind the animation, challenges drop significantly.
5. Use Demonstratives Early
Introducing animations during depositions, mediation, and expert meetings:
• Normalizes them in the record
• Reduces opposition challenges
• Strengthens expert testimony
Why Attorneys Rely on Multus Medical
• Patient-specific models
• Evidence-based accuracy
• Expert-reviewed visuals
• Zero history of admissibility issues
Our goal is simple: create courtroom-ready visuals that help attorneys communicate complex injuries clearly and credibly.
