Expert Witness Blog

Federal motor carrier safety regulations expert witness Michael K. Napier of Napier Diversified Services, Inc., answers the question “What are some of the dangers associated with large trucks on the roadways?”

* No-Zones – Large trucks have no-zones, or blind spots, that are located around the front, back, and sides of the truck. When a car is in the No-Zone, the truck driver is usually unable to see it. At these times, a large truck could turn into a passing car and a serious accident could result.

* Squeeze Play – Tractor-trailer trucks need to swing wide to the left in order to negotiate a right turn. When truck drivers make wide right turns; they are often unable to see smaller vehicles directly behind or beside them. When a car cuts between the truck and a curb, the car can be caught in a squeeze, and a serious accident can occur.

On his website, interstate motor carrier operations expert witness Lew Grill provides a link to STATE MOTOR VEHICLE CODES.

Federal motor vehicle safety standards expert witness Michael K. Napier of Napier Diversified Services, Inc., answers the question, What is the applicable law that relates to the commercial trucking industry?

The FHWA is the government agency responsible for the issuance, administration, and enforcement of Federal Motor Carrier Regulations (FMCSR). The FMCSRs are found at 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 325, 350, and 382-399. The Hazardous Materials Regulations for motor carriers are found at 49 CFR Parts 100-180. In addition, 49 CFR Part 40 regulates drug and alcohol testing requirements for motor carriers.

All carriers engaged in interstate commerce within the United States, even if from Mexico or Canada, must comply with these federal regulations. The laws of Mexico and Canada, which are less stringent than in the United States, do not apply to Mexican and Canadian trucks driving in the United States, although some interesting North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) issues are raised when trying to make the truck sizes and weights compatible between the countries.

Trucking experts at Transport Topics Online write In Pursuit of Accurate Safety Ratings:

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has taken a step in the right direction with its Comprehensive Safety Analysis, a new way of evaluating trucking safety.

Now, some serious tweaking is in order.

National Medical Consultants represents a panel of over 1900 distinguished specialists in all areas of medicine including radiology nursing. In Medical malpractice liability reform-no easy task expert witnesses at National Medical Consultants continue from January 1st blog posts:

The strategies described above do not constitute an exhaustive list of tactics implemented by states to achieve medical malpractice reform. For example, a number of states are encouraging health care providers to apologize to the patient for the medical error by prohibiting such action from being considered as an admission of guilt in future legal actions. (15) Furthermore, states are increasingly searching for new ways to address this issue as a means not only to reduce costs but also to promote patient safety, ameliorate the potentially litigious nature of the provider-patient relationship, encourage the consistent use of best practices, and to evaluate how the practices of other interested parties, such as insurance companies, affect the crisis of medical malpractice liability.

National Medical Consultants represents a panel of over 1900 distinguished specialists in all areas of medicine including operating room nursing nursing. In Medical malpractice liability reform-no easy task expert witnesses at National Medical Consultants continue from January 1st blog posts:

Reasons to resolve medical malpractice claims through alternative dispute resolution include the parties’ ability to control the procedure (eg, time, place); reduced costs; shortened time to resolve the dispute; reduced emotional trauma compared to litigation; and preservation or maintenance of the relationship between the parties. (14) Alternative dispute resolution requirements do pose some concerns, however, including whether patients receive full compensation for their injuries such as they might through litigation, whether patients are intimidated into premature settlements, and whether these pretrial negotiations serve merely to delay inevitable litigation.

National Medical Consultants represents a panel of over 1900 distinguished specialists in all areas of medicine including pediatric nursing. In Medical malpractice liability reform-no easy task expert witnesses at National Medical Consultants continue from January 1st blog posts:

Another method that states require as a prerequisite to restrict the time period when a claim for damages can be filed is to require that alternative dispute resolution negotiations, such as arbitration and/or mediation, occur before the claim is filed. Alternative dispute resolution requirements vary considerably from state to state. For example, Hawaii, Illinois, and New Jersey require that cases for claims less than a specified amount must participate in an arbitration proceeding despite the fact that the decision can be nonbinding for the parties involved. Alternatively, Michigan permits parties to agree voluntarily to arbitration, but if the claim is for $75,000 or less, the decision of the arbitrator is binding. Another variation of the alternative dispute resolution requirement is found in Oregon where all parties must participate in some form of dispute resolution unless the case is settled or all parties have voluntarily waived, in writing, the right to enter into such negotiations.

National Medical Consultants represents a panel of over 1900 distinguished specialists in all areas of medicine including neurological nursing. In Medical malpractice liability reform-no easy task expert witnesses at National Medical Consultants continue from January 1st blog posts:

The second way that states limit the number of claims for damages brought against health care providers is by requiring the plaintiff to submit a pretrial certificate of merit from a medical expert validating the claim of malpractice. About one-third of the states currently have certificate or affidavit of merit requirements for medical malpractice cases. It is widely believed among proponents of medical malpractice reform that the certificate of merit requirement will prevent excessive filings of weak claims. A number of patient-rights advocates assert, however, that this requirement places an undue burden on plaintiffs.

National Medical Consultants represents a panel of over 1900 distinguished specialists in all areas of medicine including surgical nursing. In Medical malpractice liability reform-no easy task expert witnesses at National Medical Consultants continue from January 1st blog posts:

Restricting conditions for medical malpractice claims.

A fourth strategy used by many states for medical malpractice reform is specifying at what point in time it is appropriate for an injured party to bring a claim against a health care provider. States restrict these claims in a variety of ways, three of which are discussed below.

National Medical Consultants represents a panel of over 1900 distinguished specialists in all areas of medicine including perinatal care expert witnesses. In Medical malpractice liability reform-no easy task experts at National Medical Consultants continue from January 1st blog:

Joint and several liability. A third strategy that states frequently employ to reform their medical liability system is to modify another legal doctrine, joint and several liability, which is common to cases in which more than one person caused the harm. The joint and several liability doctrine permits holding a single defendant responsible for the entire damage versus being held responsible for the percentage of the damages that can be reasonably attributed to them.A number of states have modified this doctrine by separating joint liability from several liability, thus establishing a mechanism of proportionately assigning harm among the defendants