In The Role of a Forensic Psychiatrist in Legal Proceedings forensic psychiatry expert witness and Harvard Medical School Associate Clinical Professor Harold J. Bursztajn, M.D., writes on the kinds of determinations forensic psychiatrists make in civil proceedings.

Forensic psychiatrists are involved in a range of particularized competency determinations, including the competence to make wills, dispose of property, or refuse medical treatment. In custody disputes they may be called upon to assess how autonomous and authentic the expressed wishes of a child of a certain age can be. They evaluate and testify in cases of alleged emotional harm and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Here it is necessary to reach a deep understanding of the person's life history, so as to identify prior experiences that may have created a special vulnerability to trauma (as opposed to prior impaired functioning), as well as to distinguish genuine trauma from faking, malingering, exaggerating, or misattributing.

Forensic psychiatrists are involved in worksite issues such as workers' compensation, supervisory negligence, disability discrimination, and sexual harassment. On the environmental front, they are helping to define the limits of product liability and stress caused by fear of illness. They also are trained in the use of the psychological autopsy to determine cause of death.

In Fire Experts: Times Have Changed, explosions expert witness Robert L. Rowe, CFI/PI, writes:

In today’s litigious society, much more is required to prove guilt or negligence when fires occur. A fire expert must be able to make a determination as to why a fire (or explosion) has occurred and report their findings and recommendations using the aforementioned “Scientific” methodology. This includes, recognizing the problem, defining the problem, collecting data, analyzing the data, developing a hypothesis and finally proving the hypothesis.

Gone are the days of gut feelings and “hand me down” theories as to how fires start and spread. The role of a fire expert nowadays most often involves much more. Therefore it is essential that fire experts are familiar with and follow the guidelines of NFPA 921 to insure that each investigation is conducted in a consistent manner and that all aspects of a given fire scene are properly evaluated.

In How Projects Go Awry, mold expert witness Russell Keeler writes on mold and moisture damage:

Over the years, we have observed many cases of humidity gone wild, with the attendant formation of mold or other moisture damage. Condensation can be the result of actions by the various players in the construction process.

The designer
• A design that does not provide for humidity control.
• Incomplete design documents.
• Incorrect temperature control sequence.
• Shoddy review of shop drawings.
• Failure to verify operation of the system in the field.

The contractor
• Substitutions based on price, not function.
• Poor workmanship.
• Misunderstanding of contract document intent.
• Inadequate due diligence of vendor product submittals.

The vendor
• Misunderstanding of contract document requirements.
• Yielding to contractor/owner pressure on price.
• Failure to advise on implications of alternate product submittal.

In Managing Construction Quality, construction safety expert witness Pete Fowler provides:

SOME QUICK DEFINITIONS
• Scope of Work: Written documents, usually based on the plans and specs, which identify or clarify the project definition. These documents are attached to prime and trade contracts to establish who is doing what. In theory, the “Scope” for the prime contractor should include everything being sold to the owner, and all the trade contractor “scopes” in aggregate should include everything in the prime scope, less the GC’s self-performed work.

• Hold-Point: Critical time in the construction process where construction should stop for verification of conformance with plans, specifications, standards (including performance) and contracts. Verification can include inspection, testing, recording, and reporting.

In SECURITY: By Design And Decree security expert witness Robert A. Gardner, CPP, writes on security ordinances:

Establishing liability depends in large part on the foreseeability of a specific kind of criminal attack and the amount of control the negligent party exercised over the circumstances and conditions under which the crime occurred. By citing the standards prescribed in Building Security Codes, it may be possible to demonstrate that a minimum level of security is always necessary. This is true even when no specific crime threat has been identified. The pervasive nature of crime in America presents an undeniable threat to virtually everyone. While the exact time and circumstances of criminal attacks cannot usually be predicted, it may be reasonable to forecast that a particular type of crime will occur at a given location within a definable time period.

Security Codes and Environmental Design Standards impose a duty on property developers, owners and managers to provide at least a minimum level of protection for those who enter and occupy their properties. The protective measures required will vary with the type and use of the property. But, in every instance, there will be basic preventative measures identified to address the kinds of crime that can be reasonably expected to occur. If adequate consideration has not been given to security, and/or applicable security codes have not been followed, then the stage is set for a claim of negligence should a criminal attack take place.