Abstract: This study utilized a qualitative approach to explore the experience of conflicts within and among expert psychology witnesses and attorneys. There is a lack of research addressing the issues faced by psychological experts and attorneys related to the conflicts they experience as well as the strategies they employ to resolve those conflicts. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 7 psychologists and 7 attorneys to gain understanding of their experience working with each other. 15 major themes and 1 minor theme emerged when the data were analyzed using the constant comparative method described by Maykut & Morehouse (1994). The themes that emerged were divided into 4 areas: psychologist conflict themes, psychologist resolution themes, attorney conflict themes, and attorney resolution themes. Four major psychologist conflict themes emerged: (1) Bias; (2) Different objectives; (3) Attorney behavior; and (4) Expert ethics. Psychologist resolution themes included 3 major themes: (5) Attorney-expert working relationship; (6) Increasing competence; and (7) Helping the individual; and 1 minor theme: Balance. Five major attorney conflict themes emerged: (8) Bias; (9) Expert incompetence; (10) Legal strategy and rules; (11) Money; and (12) Expert ethics. Attorney resolution themes included 3 major themes: (13) Communicate, explain, and educate; (14) Increasing credibility; and (15) Recognizing the value of experts. Specific clinical implications, recommendations for both psychologists and attorneys, and suggestions for future research are discussed.