How is the Responsibility Divided? 2

[XR250]

Got a call from a local firm asking for some expert witness help.
Without getting into too much detail, they designed a structure that subsequently collapsed. Turns out it was not constructed according to the plans. As far as I can tell from the verbal description, it had some significant design issues that would have led to a collapse regardless.

In this case, how is responsibility divided?

 

[IRstuff]

No dog in the hunt here, but it seems to me the question pivots on whether the flawed design contributed at all to the collapse.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[JAE]

There's no rule or standard that dictates how responsibility is dispersed. It's totally up to the jury or judge in the case, and the subsequent appeals...or it gets "divided" by the insurance company lawyers who work out a compromise.

 

[MintJulep]

In this case, how is responsibility divided?

In all likelihood, it will be divided in whatever way the lawyers decide to divide it.

It's not likely that the lawyers on any side want it to go to a jury.

You were contacted directly by the design firm? Not their lawyer? Seems unusual.

Unless you are desperate for the small compensation that you'll get for expert witness services, you should probably just say "No thanks, but good luck."

 

[271828]

If you think their design contributed significantly then I don't see how you can effectively be on their side. Pass.

 

[XR250]

I did pass for that reason.

 

[LittleInch]

Although you have passed, responsibility is not for the EW to determine, only the facts as presented and available to them to give their considered opinion and respond to the expert witness or determination coming from the claimants.

Often you can agree a number of issues with the "other side", but leave some to be determined by the jury / judge based on the evidence and your cross examined testimony.

This sounds like FIGG design (FIU bridge) in a nutshell to me.....

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[XR250]

Makes sense. I doubt this will go to a jury as the damages are not high enough for that to be practical.

 

[LittleInch]

The firms insurers / lawyers often want a dispassionate appraisal so they know how much to fight or concede.

That's where the art of giving the client bad news sometimes is required.

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[Tomfh]

As my old professor who had plenty of real life skin in the game said - "When things go wrong on your projects - and they will - the person whose fault it is, is the person the blame ends up landing on"

When it was designed wrong and it was built wrong, the blame can land in many different ways.