Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Construction Experts - Total Cost Claims - Total Time Claims

    Uploaded by

    Mohamed Talaat Elsheikh
    18 views3 pages

    Original Title

    CONSTRUCTION EXPERTS _ TOTAL COST CLAIMS _ TOTAL TIME CLAIMS

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    18 views3 pages

    Construction Experts - Total Cost Claims - Total Time Claims

    Uploaded by

    Mohamed Talaat Elsheikh

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3
    ® Tue HoLtoway CONSULTING Grour, LLC Construction Consultants and Expert Witnesses CONSTRUCTION EXPERTS | TOTAL COST CLAIMS | TOTAL TIME + Home + OurTeam CLAIMS 2 Newsltten/Anites| + Blog Since March of 1999, many cases involving construction schedule delay claims have also likely involved Kumho + Hogexpers Tire challenges or arguments, That month, the United States Supreme Court decided Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. V. Carmichael, 526 US 137 (1999) and expanded the gatekeeper role ofthe trial cour in allowing or rejecting expert testimony, Previously, science cases and product lisbility cases invited the Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc, $09 US $79 (1993) challenge to an expert's scientific methodology and bases for opinion. While some cases attempt to expand Daubert to non- scientific experts, the decision was considered fairly limited. Kumho provides a new weapon to challenge a construction expert's methodology. CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS EXPERTS | TOTAL COST CLAIMS | TOTAL TIME CLAIMS Kumho Tire In Kumho, the plaintiff's expert was a qualified tire-falure engineering analyst who utilized a “visual-inspection method” in concluding that a tie blowout was due to a defect in the tte. The District Court, and ultimately the Supreme Court, found this method unreliable and ‘without seientifie basis. Neither Court found thatthe expert could reliably determine the eause of the tie’s separation, The Court noted that the methodology was not widely used nor did any articles validate the methodology. The Courts found thatthe expert’s opinion was too subjective and unreliable, and would not allow the jury to consider it Applying “Kumho” to Construction Disputes The application of Kumho to construction schedule delay and damages analysis could spell the end of total time claims and total cost

    You might also like