Automotive expert witnesses may consult on auto defects, auto engines, automotive components, and automotive recalls. In the news, General Motors Co. is recalling some 2011-2014 Chevrolet Express compressed natural gas vehicles. About 3,200 vans may leak natural gas from the CNG high pressure regulator and catch fire.

SUMMARY:

General Motors LLC (GM) is recalling certain model year 2011-2014 Chevrolet Express compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles manufactured September 10, 2010, to April 28, 2014, and GMC Savana CNG vehicles manufactured May 23, 2011, to April 21, 2014. The affected vehicles may leak natural gas from the CNG high pressure regulator.

In Coming to Grips with Risk, business expert witness Shelley Lee Boyce writes that “Your tolerance for risk is an important factor in how you allocate your investment portfolio among different investments.”

While investments are subject to many different types of risk, risk tolerance typically refers to your ability to hold an investment when the return is either less than you expect or it declines in value. You should only assume a level of risk you are comfortable with, so you aren’t tempted to sell an investment when it is at a low point.

There are at least two factors affecting your risk tolerance. One is the level of investment risk appropriate for you based on your personal situation. Key factors to consider include:

In How to prepare to cross-examine an expert witness, attorney Dean Brett writes on what he describes as “one of the trial attorney’s most difficult tasks.”

Throughout my years as a trial attorney, I have found that one of the most challenging aspects of trial is cross-examining an expert witness. I’ve written an article series describing my experience and the methods I’ve used that have allowed me to gain real advantages through cross-examination of an expert witness. These methods have proven highly successful for me for 40+ years. I will be publishing the article series over the next several days, so keep an eye out for the next installment.

Part 1 – Why cross-examine an expert witness?

In Sustaining Hospital Security Programs in an Environment of Decreasing Reimbursables & Increasing Demand for Services, security management expert witness William H. Nesbitt, CPP, writes that “many hospitals are facing a decrease in reimbursables, and sometimes, in an environment of increasing demand. When budgets get tight, unfortunately, security budgets become a target for belt tightening, sometimes at the expense on increasing liability. There are practical solutions to these challenges, but these solutions must be situationally determined because security is a situational discipline.”

The most logical first step is an objective assessment of your security program. Every security program is unique and should be driven by need. Security is a situational discipline which means that no two security programs are alike, nor should they be. We frequently find relatively good security programs that are none-the less inefficient and lacking in cost-effectiveness. The goal should be to do more, with less. The security assessment becomes the foundational basis for all that follows.

We believe there are two primary opportunities for cost savings for most hospital security programs, along with secondary options to further reduce costs. First, the application of CPTED (Crime Prevention Thought Environmental Design) and the application of technology, such as smart video with outsource monitoring. Applying CPTED strategies helps to ensure that the security program is truly synergistic and supported by all employees. CPTED has been around for many years, but not taken advantage. However the attack of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in 1995 and the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center caused security professional to look a broader based security strategies. As a result, CPTED principals are more in play than ever before.

Carole Levitt and Judy Davis, co-authors of Internet Legal Research on a Budget (ABA 2014) and Mark Rosch, co-author of The Cybersleuth’s Guide to the Internet (IFL Press 2014) present Internet Legal Research on a Budget on Saturday, September 13th, 10 am-12 pm.

Are you an attorney who didn’t pay enough attention in your first year Legal Research class and now realize you should have? Or do you know all about the Internet but want to learn how to use new legal and investigative research sites that are free and low-cost (and even established sites that you have yet to try out)? Or, did you attend law school before computers existed, much less the Internet? Then this seminar is for you!

In partnership with Internet for Lawyers this class will provide instruction and tips from recognized Internet research authorities: Carole Levitt and Judy Davis, co-authors of Internet Legal Research on a Budget (ABA 2014) and Mark Rosch, co-author ofThe Cybersleuth’s Guide to the Internet (IFL Press 2014).

In Cutting Corners, forensic pathology expert witness Dr. Judy Melinek answers the question “Is it common for coroners or forensic pathologists to cut corners in a death investigation if a case does not look like foul play was involved?”

Several visitors to this blog have asked me this question recently, as part of their research into forensic science. Usually those inquiring have had direct contact with a Medical Examiner’s or Coroner’s Office – and did not find that institution particularly forthcoming. Office policies require death investigators to be careful about divulging information on open cases, and sometimes cases can be “pending” for several months while the pathologist awaits toxicology reports, microscopic slides, scene investigation or incident reports. This can be frustrating and even infuriating to the deceased’s family members. They are the ones who have to plan the funeral, and answer inquires while dealing with their own feelings of grief and even guilt about the death while the case is still “pending additional examination.” The law allows you to bury a body with a death certificate that says “pending” under “cause of death,” but that is cold comfort to the family which has to tackle the inevitable question – “What happened?” – over and over again. A death certificate that says “Hanging” and “Suicide” may not be welcome, but it is an answer.

Coroners and forensic pathologists are two different groups of people. Coroner’s deputies are death investigators (often part of a law enforcement agency, like a sheriff’s office) while forensic pathologists are the doctors who do the autopsies. Both can “cut corners,” yes – but in different ways. A Coroner’s deputy might cut corners by not visiting the scene; by not examining the scene thoroughly, either in order to save time or because they are tired (many death investigations are at ungodly hours); by trusting the reports of the people at the scene about what happened without confirming whether those reports are accurate. The death investigation doesn’t end when the deputy returns to the office and writes up the case. Frequently they have to complete their investigation, or ask others to, by getting medical records, police reports or questioning other witnesses who were not at the scene when they picked up the body.

In Defining the Chiropractic Standard Of Care, chiropractic expert witness Richard K. Skala, D.C., writes:

IS THERE A LEGAL DEFINITION OF THE CHIROPRACTIC STANDARD OF CARE?

Based on the definitions above, as well as my medical legal experience, the chiropractic standard of care can be summed up as follows:

Expert Witness Skills Workshop offered by The American Institute of CPAs

Do you have the confidence and communications skills necessary to serve as an effective expert witness under pressure? Are you often chosen to serve as an expert witness by outside clients? How do you communicate to jurors today that are more technical and have different expectations of testimony and witnesses? Limited to just 36 participants, the AICPA Expert Skills Workshop answers all of these questions and covers the expert witness process from qualifications to depositions to mock trial.

In three intensive days, you will:

Arbitration and mediation expert witnesses may consult on American Arbitration Association rules, binding arbitration, nonbinding arbitration, and alternative dispute resolution. On June 16, 2014, the American Arbitration Association released new rules on construction disputes.

NEW AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION SUPPLEMENTARY RULES ENABLE PREDICTABLE TIME-AND-COST CONSTRUCTION ARBITRATION June 16, 2014 Parties involved in construction disputes now have the option of selecting supplementary rules that will limit the cost and duration of their arbitration proceedings. The new supplementary rules developed by the American Arbitration Association (AAA®) took effect on June 15, 2014.

Working with its National Construction Dispute Resolution Committee (NCDRC), the AAA created new Supplementary Rules for Fixed Time and Cost Construction Arbitration that will allow parties to calculate the maximum time to complete the arbitration, the number of hearing days, and the arbitrator costs. For example, for cases in the $250,000 to $500,000 range, the rules prescribe a maximum of 180 days from filing to award, with no more than three hearing days. Arbitrator compensation for hearing days and study time (limited to 12 hours) is capped at $275 an hour. Administrative fees to the AAA are fixed at $5,000.