“If you measure it you can manage it” – and do thorough forensic engineering, and cost effective civil litigation

The primary task of a forensic engineer is to investigate the physical causes of failures and accidents, and to explain what happened to counsel and the judicial system.

Engineers and civil litigation lawyers do this best – thoroughly and cost effectively, with different measurements.

The built environment, where the failures and accidents occur, is a physical place.  It’s defined by dimensions – measurements.  That’s the language of the built environment like words are the language of the judicial environment.  Even the physical properties of the building materials – e.g., the strength of steel, the drainage characteristics of soil, are defined by measures of one kind or another.

Examples of different measurements – the language of the built environment

  • The property owner wants a structure of some sort, of a certain size and shape and made of certain materials – as defined by different measurements.
  • The design engineer designs the structure – specifies the size, shape and material properties of the components with different measurements.
  • The construction engineer builds the structure – according to the different measurements.
  • The maintenance engineer ensures the structure can be used during its life by fixing or replacing components that break or wear out – according to the original design measurements.

Good project management is a thread running through this design, construction, and maintenance process, made possible by different measurements.

More examples of different measurements

  • Measurement of physical properties by feet and inches,
  • Project schedule by date, days and hours, and,
  • Project cost by dollars and cents.

If a failure or accident occurs during any stage of this process then a lawyer might be consulted by one or more of the parties involved if they thought something went wrong that was not of their doing.

Good case management – would dictate that the lawyer would in turn confer with a forensic engineer about the investigation of the failure or accident.  From this would come an estimate – a measure, albeit very approximate, of the cost of the forensic investigation. (Refs 1, 2 and 3) This estimated cost would assist the lawyer assess the merits of the case and his decision about taking it.

The lawyer’s cost effective management of the case would start at this point.  He would assess if a damage award would cover his legal fees and expenses, the cost of the forensic investigation, and compensation for the parties involved.  The lawyer would take a measure of whether or not the case would be adequately funded.

If the case goes ahead, the forensic engineer would determine the nature of the structure before and after the failure or accident and what took place during the incident.  His work would consist of standard engineering investigations and follow-up investigations, and observations and analyses throughout the process. (Ref. 4)  All supported by measurements of one kind or another.  This measuring would enable a thorough forensic investigation and good project management of the investigation.

If the case goes ahead, the lawyer would monitor the cost of the forensic investigation as it progressed.  He would note the developing costs and how they relate to the estimate. The engineer would assist by estimating and updating investigative costs at each stage as accurately as possible – taking their measure, and reporting these costs as directed by the lawyer.  This monitoring would enable good case management and contribute to cost effective civil litigation.

Counsel, the judicial system and the injured party would be well served if a case were measured and managed like this.

Rather than poorly served as sometimes happens, when an estimate – a measure, of legal plus forensic costs is not made at the start by an experienced civil litigation lawyer and an experienced engineer.  The investigation is stopped mid-investigation because of cost.  Sometimes stopped so completely that the judicial system and the injured party never see relevant technical data that could tip the scales one way or the other.  Because, getting the data to the judicial system in a report is one of the costs that would not have been measured at the start.

“If you measure it you can manage it”.  And manage it well if the civil litigation lawyer and the engineer begin estimating and measuring everything at the start when the merits of the case are being assessed.

References

  1. Difficulty estimating the cost of forensic engineering investigation http://www.ericjorden.com/blog/2013/07/23/difficulty-estimating-the-cost-of-forensic-engineering-investigation/
  2. Why the difficulty estimating the cost of forensic engineering investigation? http://www.ericjorden.com/blog/2013/09/01/why-the-difficulty-estimating-the-cost-of-forensic-engineering-investigation/
  3. Managing the cost of civil litigation http://www.ericjorden.com/blog/2013/09/19/managing-the-cost-of-civil-litigation/
  4. Steps in the forensic engineering investigative process with an appendix on costs http://www.ericjorden.com/blog/2013/07/15/steps-in-the-forensic-engineering-investigative-process-with-an-appendix-on-costs/

Comments are closed.