Litigation Support Research Articles

Introduction to statistics and econometrics in litigation support

Introduction to statistics and econometrics in litigation support

The Role of the Academic Economist in Litigation Support

Abstract No abstract available.

Statistical outlier analysis in litigation support: the case of Paul F. Engler and Cactus Feeders, Inc., v. Oprah Winfrey et al.

In the 1990s three decisions of the United States Supreme Court raised standards for admissibility of scientific and special knowledge testimony in Federal trials. Many states have adopted comparable standards. Expert economic testimony that seeks to prove facts from statistical generalizations has received considerable scrutiny in litigation. This article focuses on the nitty-gritty of performing regression studies that can meet the new standards for admissibility. The article redefines chance outliers in terms of tail probabilities of distributions. Tests for presence of outliers produced by anomalous factors are specified in terms of number of diagnosed outliers and waiting-times of their occurrence.

Human Factors at the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

The Human Factors Division at the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is an eclectic group, reflecting the multidisciplinary demands typically made upon an HF organization. The objective in these five presentations is to paint a picture of the full spectrum of human factors practiced in this unique government regulatory agency. The participants will each describe their work and illustrate the day-to-day characteristics of their human factors analyses. The range of discussions will address the overlay and integration of professional practice into policy, the regulatory environment, litigation support, and representation of the Agency to the interests of corporate, consumer, trade, and standards organizations.

The roles of experts and litigation support consultants in medical-legal claims

Brain injury claims frequently involve the use of experts to evaluate and document extent of impairment. These experts can cover a wide array of specialities, many of which are delineated in this article. It is pointed out that there are crucial differences between a clinical evaluation and a medical-legal evaluation as the latter is generally more comprehensive and addresses many of the specific issues that arise in a forensic claim. It is suggested that use of a litigation support consultant can provide valuable assistance for the attorney at the outset and over the course of handling a claim such as with selection of experts and preparation for direct and cross examination of experts. Suggestions are also made about criteria for selection of experts such as to ensure that appropriate objectivity, and, consequently, admissibility of conclusions is maintained.

The Tools of Environmental Litigation Support: How Environmental Litigation Support Teams Employ a Unique Set of Skills and Tools to Improve the Outcome and Reduce the Cost of Legal Disputes

While the primary goal of environmental investigations is to assess and clean up contaminated properties, significant efforts are also directed towards resolving various matters in legal dispute. Opposing parties often disagree about the cause and timing of contamination and the associated liability and costs for meeting regulatory site closure requirements. Environmental experts are often needed to help resolve such legal disputes with expertise in hydrogeology, toxicology, microbiology, chemistry, engineering, and process safety. These experts, or teams of experts, provide technical approaches to determine the liability and cost apportionment amongst the various potentially responsible parties. Fate and transport models, environmental forensics, and risk assessment help to answer the issues in dispute. Skillful communication of these technical findings is needed to present conclusions to audiences that do not necessarily have technical backgrounds.

ASHSD‐II: A computational model for litigation support

Abstract: In this paper a hybrid knowledge‐based system which exploits both rule‐based reasoning (RBR) and case‐based reasoning (CBR) is presented. The issues of RBR and CBR in general in the context of legal knowledge‐based systems and legislation in rule form and previously‐decided cases in an interconnected graph form are discussed. It is possible for the user to select either reasoning method (RBR or CBR), or indicate no preference. The rule base of this system consists of two types of rule. The first type of rule determines which options are legally applicable. The second type indicates how the courts are likely to act within the range of options available, which is determined by the first type of rule. When CBR is selected, the system uses the features of previously‐decided cases to select the most similar cases to the situation that is described in the input and displays their details of decisions. In case of the selection of no preference option, the system applies RBR and CBR method separately, and then presents results based on an automated relative rating of the qualities of the RBR (based on the second type of rules) and CBR advice. These ideas have been implemented in a prototype system, known as Advisory Support for Home Settlement in Divorce (ASHSD‐II).

Claim Prevention and Litigation Support: Industrial Hygienists Can Make a Difference

Claim Prevention and Litigation Support: Industrial Hygienists Can Make a Difference

Plumes Dont Move

Groundwater Monitoring & RemediationVolume 17, Issue 1 p. 52-55 Plumes Dont Move Evan K. Nyer, Evan K. Nyer Evan K. Nyer is a vice president with Geraghty & Miller Inc., where he is responsible for maintaining and expanding the company's technical expertise in geology/hydrogeology, engineering, modeling, risk assessment, and bioremediation. He has been active in the development of new treatment technologies for many years. His areas of research interest include biological treatment, suspended solids separation, chemical oxidation, in situ treatment, air treatment systems, and the application of new technologies to ground water cleanup. He has been responsible for the strategies, technical design, and installation of more than 200 ground water and soil remediation systems at contaminated sites throughout the United States.Search for more papers by this authorMary J. Gearhart, Mary J. Gearhart Mary J. Gearhart is a principal engineer in Geraghty & Miller's Seattle office and has more than I7 years experience in environmental engineering. She has managed or been involved in nearly 100 ground water investigations and remedial actions, including those with sol-vents, wood products wastes, low-level radioactive wastes, and inorganics from industrial processes. She is currently serving as senior advisor for several litigation support efforts regarding ground water plumes and subsequent remediation plans.Search for more papers by this author Evan K. Nyer, Evan K. Nyer Evan K. Nyer is a vice president with Geraghty & Miller Inc., where he is responsible for maintaining and expanding the company's technical expertise in geology/hydrogeology, engineering, modeling, risk assessment, and bioremediation. He has been active in the development of new treatment technologies for many years. His areas of research interest include biological treatment, suspended solids separation, chemical oxidation, in situ treatment, air treatment systems, and the application of new technologies to ground water cleanup. He has been responsible for the strategies, technical design, and installation of more than 200 ground water and soil remediation systems at contaminated sites throughout the United States.Search for more papers by this authorMary J. Gearhart, Mary J. Gearhart Mary J. Gearhart is a principal engineer in Geraghty & Miller's Seattle office and has more than I7 years experience in environmental engineering. She has managed or been involved in nearly 100 ground water investigations and remedial actions, including those with sol-vents, wood products wastes, low-level radioactive wastes, and inorganics from industrial processes. She is currently serving as senior advisor for several litigation support efforts regarding ground water plumes and subsequent remediation plans.Search for more papers by this author First published: 22 February 2007 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6592.1997.tb01183.xCitations: 1AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume17, Issue1February 1997Pages 52-55 RelatedInformation

Pratt, S.P., Reilly, R.F., and Schweihs, R.P. Valuing a Business: The Analysis and Appraisal of Closely Held Companies, Third Edition

BOOK REVIEWS 101Contemporary Real Estate Finance: Selected Readings is representative of the scholarly work that has been produced over the last decade, on the theory and application of real estate finance methods and instruments, as well as on real estate investment analysis. This text will be useful to both faculty and students. And, while there are other articles that could have been included in this work, particularly in Part 2, Mortgages, this selection of articles is quite comprehensive. It is certainly expedient to have such a high caliber of real estate finance-related articles under one cover.Marion Rogers SillahFlorida A&M UniversityPratt, S.P., Reilly, R.F., and Schweihs, R.P., Valuing a Business: The Analysis and Appraisal of Closely Held Companies, Third Edition, Irwin Professional Publishing-Chicago. 1996.850 pages.While there are a number of good books available for use in a course on business valuation, this is the only one clearly written in a textbook style. This makes this book especially useful for teachers but perhaps less interesting to valuation professionals. It is a good textbook.The first 375 pages (44 percent) covers the basic theory and how-to of business valuation while the balance (56 percent) focuses on special topics along with report writing and reviewing chapters. This 40/60 split may, at first glance, seem inappropriate but, on reflection, probably makes sense. The theory and practice of business appraisal are relatively simple, while the application to various companies and industries can be quite challenging. A heavy focus on special topics (debt securities, preferred stock, pass-through entities, intangibles, taxation issues, buy-sell agreements, ad valorem issues, ESOPs, litigation support, and testimony) provides students and practicing appraisers alike with, in most cases, some very specific guidance regarding these particular areas.Part 1 (three chapters) serves as introductory material to both the business of business valuation and to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), which is so critical to success today. The second part (five chapters) focuses on data acquisition and analysis, while Part 3 of the book, in eight chapters, covers the actual formation of value conclusions on the part of the appraiser. This is the meat of the text since it covers, in right much detail, the various appraisal methodologies that may be applied to the business valuation problem. These three parts are especially well organized and written. The balance (Parts 4 through 7) contain the above-mentioned practice elements of the book.The authors very properly point out to the reader of their third edition that they should not throw away your second edition because they dropped older bibliographical references and case citations. …

The Valuation of Health Care Intangible Assets

Health care entities (and especially medical practices) are valued for a number of reasons: sale transaction pricing and structuring, merger formation and dissolution, taxation and regulatory compliance, and litigation support and dispute resolution. The identification and quantification of the entity's intangible assets are often the most important aspects of the valuation. This article illustrates the generally accepted methods for valuing health care-related intangible assets.

The Valuation of Health Care Intangible Assets

Health care entities (and especially medical practices) are valued for a number of reasons: sale transaction pricing and structuring, merger formation and dissolution, taxation and regulatory compliance, and litigation support and dispute resolution. The identification and quantification of the entity's intangible assets are often the most important aspects of the valuation. This article illustrates the generally accepted methods for valuing health care-related intangible assets.

Electro-forensic engineering: an emerging profession

With the increasing number of legal cases involving the application of electrical equipment, forensic engineering is playing a greater role in providing litigation support. This article discusses the qualifications and role of the electro-forensic engineer. Safety practices, importance of codes and standards and how to minimize accidents and liability are growing concerns with electrical equipment manufacturers, systems designers, contractors and owners. The electro-forensic engineer can make positive contributions beyond litigation support as explained in this article. The need for recommended practices or standards for the electro-forensic engineer to perform in a professional manner is also discussed.

Reflections on a Work-Oriented Design Project

This article reports our experiences in developing a work-oriented design practice. We sketch our general approach to relating work practice studies and design, including our use of case-based prototypes. We go on to describe our entry into the law firm that was the setting for this project and our decision to focus our design efforts on two forms of work at the firm. We discuss our experiences in developing a case-based prototype to support the work of document search and retrieval. We then describe our encounters with organizational politics at the firm in the context of a joint exploration of image analysis technologies in relation to the work of litigation support. We conclude with findings on the practices of working with document collections, the value of case-based prototypes, and recommendations for combining work practice studies and design interventions.

Recent developments in cleanup technologies

Remediation JournalVolume 6, Issue 1 p. 103-109 Column Recent developments in cleanup technologies Benedict L. Suplick, Benedict L. Suplick Benedict L. Suplick, P.E. is a senior engineer with Environmental Strategies Corporation in Minneapolis, Minnesota. His responsibilities include designing, procuring, and managing the installation of remedial systems at contaminated sites; evaluating remedial options and costs in preparation of litigation support documents; managing operating remedial systems; and conducting environmental assessments.Search for more papers by this author Benedict L. Suplick, Benedict L. Suplick Benedict L. Suplick, P.E. is a senior engineer with Environmental Strategies Corporation in Minneapolis, Minnesota. His responsibilities include designing, procuring, and managing the installation of remedial systems at contaminated sites; evaluating remedial options and costs in preparation of litigation support documents; managing operating remedial systems; and conducting environmental assessments.Search for more papers by this author First published: Winter 1995 https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.3440060109 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume6, Issue1Winter 1995Pages 103-109 RelatedInformation

The Crisis In Litigation Support

The Crisis In Litigation Support

Recent developments in cleanup technologies

Remediation JournalVolume 5, Issue 1 p. 137-148 Column Recent developments in cleanup technologies Lisa K. Bryda, Lisa K. Bryda Lisa K. Bryda is a senior hydrogeologist with Environmental Strategies Corporation in Reston, Virginia. Her responsibillties include project management, design, and implementation of primarlly hydrogeologic investigations and remediations of contaminated sites, preparing litigation support documents using hydrogeologic interpretation for environmental claims, and conducting environmental assessments in the United States and abroad. John A.Search for more papers by this authorJohn A. Simon, John A. Simon Simon is a vice president of Environmental Strategies Corporation. His responsibilities include directing the remediation of bazardous waste sites. He routinely tracks the development of innovative bazardous waste remediation technologies.Search for more papers by this author Lisa K. Bryda, Lisa K. Bryda Lisa K. Bryda is a senior hydrogeologist with Environmental Strategies Corporation in Reston, Virginia. Her responsibillties include project management, design, and implementation of primarlly hydrogeologic investigations and remediations of contaminated sites, preparing litigation support documents using hydrogeologic interpretation for environmental claims, and conducting environmental assessments in the United States and abroad. John A.Search for more papers by this authorJohn A. Simon, John A. Simon Simon is a vice president of Environmental Strategies Corporation. His responsibilities include directing the remediation of bazardous waste sites. He routinely tracks the development of innovative bazardous waste remediation technologies.Search for more papers by this author First published: Winter 1994 https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.3440050111Citations: 4 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume5, Issue1Winter 1994Pages 137-148 RelatedInformation

The IKBALS project: Multi-modal reasoning in legal knowledge based systems

In attempting to build intelligent litigation support tools, we have moved beyond first generation, production rule legal expert systems. Our work integrates rule based and case based reasoning with intelligent information retrieval. When using the case based reasoning methodology, or in our case the specialisation of case based retrieval, we need to be aware of how to retrieve relevant experience. Our research, in the legal domain, specifies an approach to the retrieval problem which relies heavily on an extended object oriented/rule based system architecture that is supplemented with causal background information. We use a distributed agent architecture to help support the reasoning process of lawyers. Our approach to integrating rule based reasoning, case based reasoning and case based retrieval is contrasted to the CABARET and PROLEXS architectures which rely on a centralised blackboard architecture. We discuss in detail how our various cooperating agents interact, and provide examples of the system at work. The IKBALS system uses a specialised induction algorithm to induce rules from cases. These rules are then used as indices during the case based retrieval process. Because we aim to build legal support tools which can be modified to suit various domains rather than single purpose legal expert systems, we focus on principles behind developing legal knowledge based systems. The original domain chosen was theAccident Compensation Act 1989 (Victoria, Australia), which relates to the provision of benefits for employees injured at work. For various reasons, which are indicated in the paper, we changed our domain to that ofCredit Act 1984 (Victoria, Australia). This Act regulates the provision of loans by financial institutions. The rule based part of our system which provides advice on the Credit Act has been commercially developed in conjunction with a legal firm. We indicate how this work has lead to the development of a methodology for constructing rule based legal knowledge based systems. We explain the process of integrating this existing commercial rule based system with the case base reasoning and retrieval architecture.

Terminal emulation controllers, duplex, communication protocols, multisession networks, up/down-load, copy protection, baud-rate, and windows compatibility: profit measures and product features

This study finds that the most profitable short-term, add-on Terminal Emulator (TE) products are Data-Stream-To-Disk, Multi-Session, and Net-Work Printer capabilities. In the longer term, as fixed costs become avoidable, the same products remain the most profitable, only their rank changes. In the long term Multi-Session is the first, Net-Work Printer is second, and Data-Stream-To-Disk is the last. The selection of appropriate features for TE products can be very difficult for both manufacturers, as well as for end-users. This study describes an interactive microcomputer based Feature Selection System (FSS). The Feature Price Contribution Margin (FPCM) measures to what degree a specific feature meets end-user needs, and measures how profitable they are for the developer and the manufacturer FSS produces a segmented income statement of possible future product lines. It also compares the outcome of integrating and bundling a feature into a product, versus marketing this feature as a separate “add-on” product line to a TE. In such context, it could also be used for litigation support to quantify the damages that result from the absence of a feature to either the vendor or the end-user.

Designing intelligent litigation support tools: The IKBALS perspective

In the legal domain, it is rare to find solutions to problems by simply applying algorithms or invoking deductive rules in some knowledge‐based program. Instead, expert practitioners often supplement domain‐specific knowledge with field experience. This type of expertise is often applied in the form of an analogy. This research proposes to combine both reasoning with precedents and reasoning with statutes and regulations in a way that will enhance the statutory interpretation task. This is being attempted through the integration of database and expert system technologies. Case‐based reasoning is being used to model legal precedents while rule‐based reasoning modules are being used to model the legislation and other types of causal knowledge. It is hoped to generalise these findings and to develop a formal methodology for integrating case‐based databases with rule‐based expert systems in the legal domain.