by

In Machine Guarding: The Second Alternative, equipment expert witness Albert Rauck, P.E., CSP, writes on machinery safety devices:

The second alternative can, when used in conjunction with the design consideration, be very effective in eliminating the dangerous condition. Safety devices include the whole range of machine guarding techniques such as fixed or automatic mechanical guards, safety mats, light curtains, safety gates, machine interlocks etc. Care must be taken to assure that machines guards are not removed for maintenance and not reinstalled or the guards are not defeated by workers in an effort to speed up the process.

The third alternative should be employed when the first and second alternatives cannot be used to eliminate the dangerous condition. The provision of warning devices should alert the exposed people to the specific danger and be consistently applied. These devices include signage, warning alarms (horns and lights), warning strips and ropes etc.

by

Wikipedia tells us that “forensic engineering is the investigation of materials, products, structures or components that fail or do not operate/function as intended, causing personal injury for example. In Industry Standards, Technology Associates, the forensic engineering expert witness company has this to say on industry standards.

A standard can be defined as a document issued by a recognized agency, and dealing with design and/or safety requirements relating to a specific product or type of activity. Such agencies include the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (051-IA) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). OSHA standards are generally legally binding for an employer, while ANSI standards are generally of an advisory nature. The term “industry standard,” however, is ordinarily taken to have a broader meaning, including formal standards as just defined, and also including designs and procedures not required in formal standards, though prevailing in a specific industry, and which represent generally accepted custom and practice.

by

In Machine Guarding: The Second Alternative, equipment expert witness Albert Rauck, P.E., CSP, writes on machinery safety devices:

The first thought should be given to the design of the process. Remember the danger results from the combination of hazard and exposure. Eliminate either one and the dangerous condition no longer exists. Is it possible to eliminate the human from the process through automation? Can the operator be relocated to a safer position? Can the process be changed to eliminate the hazard? Obviously the ideal time to make these decisions is during the design of the process but other opportune times are during a renovation, machine rebuild etc. Often it is not possible to completely design out the dangerous condition but it is possible to greatly reduce the risk to a more acceptable level. The reason that this is the highest priority is that it eliminates the dangerous condition whereas the other alternatives do not.

by

In When the Going Gets Tough – Analyzing Concurrent Delays, Thelen Reid’s Andrew D. Ness writes that “Proving or disproving a construction delay claim is a substantial undertaking in the best of circumstances. But the analysis of construction delays takes a major leap in difficulty when there are multiple sources or causes of delay with interrelated effects.” The construction expert witness can opine on what Ness describes as:

Multiple Activities – Multiple Delays
The level of complexity steps up considerably when the situation involves different causes of delay acting on different activities, whether at the same time or at different times during the project. For example, take a building project where the owner has delayed structural steel delivery by making late design changes. The contractor has had difficulty excavating the site in order to begin the foundations. How is the overall project delay from these two causes to be apportioned between owner and contractor? Which one is really delaying the project, or are both causes delaying completion?

by

KHB Consulting Services Kenneth H. Brown, Ph.D., provides hazardous materials expert witness and consulting services to attorneys and insurance professionals for cases involving chemicals, paint & coatings and other products which contain chemicals. As an expert witness, Brown:

‘Translates’ chemical jargon into easy-to-understand language so that you can understand the implications.

Recommends what additional documents, information or materials are needed to help with the case.

Continue reading

by

In When the Going Gets Tough – Analyzing Concurrent Delays, Thelen Reid’s Andrew D. Ness writes that “Proving or disproving a construction delay claim is a substantial undertaking in the best of circumstances. But the analysis of construction delays takes a major leap in difficulty when there are multiple sources or causes of delay with interrelated effects.” The construction expert witness can opine on what Ness describes as:

One Activity – Multiple Delays
The most straightforward situation involving multiple sources of delay occurs when there are two separate causes of delay to a single work activity. For example, an owner-directed change may have caused a particular activity to be less efficient while at the same time the contractor may have used a smaller crew or less efficient equipment than planned to perform the work. How then is the extended duration of the activity to be apportioned between owner and contractor? Almost every impact claim contains issues of this nature. It may seem apparent that the owner-directed change had an adverse effect on the time to perform a particular activity, but whether the impact was substantial or insignificant is debatable, and it is a challenge for either side to quantify the effect specifically.

by

When working with an inexperienced expert witness, they will need to be prepared for deposition the same as a lay witness. For example, the equipment and machinery expert witness working on your case will be conversant in their field but will need to know that:

They are under oath.

They need to understand questions before answering.

Continue reading

by

In Finding a Remedy For Renters, security expert witness John a. Harris writes:

In most inadequate-security suits, then, the first step in establishing foreseeability is to examine the criminal history of the property. Review reports of calls for police service to find how many residents reported crimes on the premises and in the immediate vicinity, when and where those crimes occurred, and their similarity or other relationship to the crime involving your client. Reported burglaries are important because future burglaries may lead to assaults against people in the apartment.”

After examining the calls for service, obtain police incident reports for those that appear most pertinent. Police reports will yield more detail, including a narrative by the responding officer.

by

DNA expert witness Dan E. Krane of Forensic Bioinformatics, Inc. on scientific evidence:

What makes scientific evidence so powerful in court is very simple: it’s supposed to be scientific. That means that it is supposed to be objective and completely independent of the subject of an investigation (a suspect or a defendant). It is therefore absolutely shocking that DNA testing laboratories routinely put themselves in a situation where specific information about a subject’s DNA profile might influence their interpretation of an evidence sample.

Last December, eleven prominent experts from around the US and even Scotland met in Washington, DC to discuss the problem of examiner bias/context effect in DNA profiling. Given the breadth of expertise and roles of these experts it surprised many of us that we were able to not only agree about the magnitude and nature of the problem, but also to a solution. The result was the generation of a position paper that has been published in this month’s Journal of Forensic Sciences.

Continue reading

by

In Finding a Remedy For Renters, security expert witness John a. Harris writes:

When crime occurs in a residential apartment building, a security expert witness can help you evaluate whether the victim has a viable case against the property owner… Security is one of the foremost problems facing apartment-community owners because apartments have become prime targets for criminals in recent years. Criminals are often drawn to a particular property because they know the owner has not taken adequate security measures. Owners may give security a low priority, choosing instead to focus on “curb appeal”amenities such as landscaping, tennis courts, gyms, and swimming pools to attract and retain tenants…

Residents are often transient and thus less likely to know one another, visitors and delivery persons come and go at odd hours, and organizations such as Community Watch are more difficult to sustain because residents are not permanent. Frequently, young residents are living away from home for the first time and are naive about the possibility of crime. Also, residents may assume, often incorrectly, that the owner is providing adequate security because the property appears well maintained, well lit, and secure with gates and fences-and because the leasing agent indicated to the residents that the property was safe when they signed the lease. Despite these challenges, landlords must make security issues a top priority.