{"id":7659,"date":"2019-08-23T15:17:50","date_gmt":"2019-08-23T18:17:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/?p=7659"},"modified":"2019-08-23T15:17:50","modified_gmt":"2019-08-23T18:17:50","slug":"basic-advice-to-u-s-experts-supports-simple-approximate-methods-in-canada","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/2019\/08\/23\/basic-advice-to-u-s-experts-supports-simple-approximate-methods-in-canada\/","title":{"rendered":"Basic advice to U.S. experts supports simple, approximate methods in Canada"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>Reasonableness<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0jumped out at me when I read some words of advice from a US attorney to experts regarding\u00a0<em>Criteria for Admissibility of Expert Opinion Testimony Under Daubert and Its Progeny: <\/em>(Ref. 1)<\/p>\n<p><em>&#8220;Remember the three R&#8217;s: <\/em><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><em>Reliability,\u00a0<\/em><\/li>\n<li><em><\/em><em>Reasonableness and <\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>Repeatability. <\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><em>Every step of the expert&#8217;s investigative process should pay attention to these three factors: <\/em><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><em>The <strong>reliability<\/strong> of the investigative procedures used; <\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>The <strong>reasonableness<\/strong> of the conclusions formulated; and <\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>The ability to demonstrate, through <strong>repetitive<\/strong> analyses, that the investigative method and resulting opinions are scientifically valid and worthy of being presented to the trier of fact. &#8212; Elliot R. Feldman, Esq., Cozen O&#8217;Connor&#8221;<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>(Quote altered to break up a big paragraph and make more readable)<\/p>\n<p>These factors allow for simple, approximate methods of investigation if decided appropriate by a reasonable person.\u00a0 Thank heaven, because not everything is clean and pretty, and exact and precise in forensic engineering investigation.\u00a0 Think everything to do with the messy ground, and the structures supported there, and the natural environment in general<\/p>\n<p>I defended simple, approximate investigative methods in a recent blog on the standard of care that had a reasonableness theme.\u00a0 (Ref. 2)<\/p>\n<p>For example, the drag sled method for determining the skid resistance of a floor &#8211; the simple coefficient of friction of the floor material in high school physics.\u00a0 You drag a known weight across a floor, measure the drag, divide the one by the other and you got your coefficient of friction\/skid resistance.\u00a0 It can&#8217;t get more simple and scientific than that.<\/p>\n<p>The method meets the criteria for the admissibility of expert evidence in the U.S. and I&#8217;m sure in Canada.\u00a0 It&#8217;s<span style=\"color: #3366ff;\"><strong>\u00a0reliable<\/strong> <\/span>in giving an approximate answer based on <span style=\"color: #3366ff;\"><strong>repetitive<\/strong><\/span> testing that would be noted in the conclusions. Approximate investigative methods are <span style=\"color: #3366ff;\"><strong>reasonable<\/strong> <\/span>in some situations, and <span style=\"color: #000000;\">scientifically valid.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>As an experienced civil engineer, I like <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>reasonable<\/strong><\/span> considering the failures and accidents we must investigate in the sometimes messy built and natural environments.\u00a0 Explaining these investigations to non-technical people and the trier of fact is often the demanding part.<\/p>\n<p><strong style=\"color: #000000; font-style: normal;\">References<\/strong><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><em><\/em>As reported in <em>Expert Communications<\/em>, Dallas, Texas, August, 2019 (A consulting firm that provides marketing services to experts in the US)<\/li>\n<li><em>Is there a case for a multi standard of care? No.\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>Posted June 27, 2019<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Reasonableness\u00a0jumped out at me when I read some words of advice from a US attorney to experts regarding\u00a0Criteria for Admissibility of Expert Opinion Testimony Under Daubert and Its Progeny: (Ref. 1) &#8220;Remember the three R&#8217;s: Reliability,\u00a0 Reasonableness and Repeatability. Every &hellip; <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/2019\/08\/23\/basic-advice-to-u-s-experts-supports-simple-approximate-methods-in-canada\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7659"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7659"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7659\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7708,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7659\/revisions\/7708"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7659"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7659"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.ericjorden.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7659"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}