RE: Standard Practice[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: Standard Practice
- From: "Caldwell, Stan" <scaldwell(--nospam--at)halff.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:54:57 -0500
I'm through on this one ....
Then, Gerard wrote:
Just to wrap it up ...
A record of the calcs is a benefit to find out the truth ... Bad for the defendant only if the calcs show they did something wrong, but possibly good if it shows code compliance as an example.
Now I'm done you can have the last word if you want ....
Thank you for your permission <grin>! There are two points that still need to be made:
1] There is no such thing as a perfect structural design, a perfect set of drawings and specifications, or a perfect set of calculations. There never has been, and there never will be.
2] A plaintiff's expert witness WILL be able to find "substantial problems" in every design, every set of drawings and specifications, and every set of calculations. These "problems" do not have to have any basis whatsoever in reality, as long as they can establish a degree of credibility in the minds of judges and jurors. Calculations are usually the first point of attack simply because they offer the highest opportunity for the least effort. Finally, you should be aware that plaintiff's experts generally have an advantage, because they are not constrained by your sense of ethics and morals!
Stan Caldwell, P.E.
- Prev by Subject: Re: STANDARD PRACTICE
- Next by Subject: RE: STANDARD PRACTICE
- Previous by thread: Re: STANDARD PRACTICE
- Next by thread: What Exposure to use?