Water damage expert witnesses may be sought out for property damage cases because of their backgrounds in construction, building inspection, and other relevant areas. Water damage consulting may provide essential information for cases involving such issues as property damage, property appraisal, general contracting, floor covering, fire protection and safety engineering, structural engineering, or civil engineering, among other related disciplines, as each may be a significant factor in the event of a potential lawsuit.
Water damage experts may be called upon for a case to provide an expert opinion on the results of a building inspection, since the presence of water damage may be cause for litigation. Many water damage expert witnesses often have experience with construction claims concerning construction damages, construction management, construction defects, construction delays, and real estate development. It is very important that construction projects adhere to the proper codes and compliance required of building sites, the violation of which may lead to flooding and other types of damage.
Water damage, flooding, and moisture intrusion may also cause mold and fungus, which can lead to poor air quality and other safety issues. Water damage cases may also involve cost estimating for construction defect remediation, whether it involves repairing sprinklers, plumbing, refrigeration, HVAC (heating, ventilating, and air conditioning), or other such areas.
ForensisGroup works at matching attorneys with the most trusted of quality experts from across the country. Call our office today or fill out and Submit An Expert Request Form to retain an authoritative water damage expert witness for your case.
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently heard an appeal from a district court's denial of a motion for new trial on the basis of excluded expert evidence.A jury awarded an insured under a commercial-property insurance policy $76,000 for covered hail and wind damage to the exterior of two properties, but it found that the policy didn’t cover the water damage to the interiors.A hail storm damaged Appellant’s properties, and she sought coverage replacing the damaged portions of the homes. Insurance Company disputed the claims, and they went to trial on two of the properties. The parties didn’t dispute that hail and wind damage to the properties' exteriors constituted a covered loss under the policy. However, they disagreed on the amount of coverage and whether the policy covered water damage to the properties' interiors. Appellant claimed that damage to the roofs and windows let water seep inside and that the resulting interior water damage was a covered loss. Insurance Company said that water leaked into the properties because of deferred maintenance, not hail damage. As such, it refused to cover the interior damage.Appellant enlisted a public adjuster and a roofing consultant to assess the damage. The insurance expert inspected the properties and issued a written expert report, which described hail and wind damage to both properties' exteriors, particularly the roofs. The insurance expert observed interior water damage at both properties, and based on its location and its appearance shortly after the storm, he opined that it was from water entering the homes through the external damage. He also said that the roofs and other items at both properties should be replaced. Appellant’s roofing expert issued an expert report based solely on his review of the insurance expert's and Insurance Company's reports and photographs of the properties. In that report, he opined regarding on property that "[w]ater intrusion within the home may be the result of defects within the . . . roof caused by wind and hail impact." The report didn’t mention water damage to one of the property's interior but did note that the roof was damaged and that it required major repair or replacement.Appellant’s roofing expert wanted to take a core sample of the property's roof to determine how it was constructed, but snow and ice kept him from doing so at the time of his initial report. But he went to the property later to take the samples, which showed the presence of moisture both within a top roof layer and an older layer beneath it. The expert believed this indicated that the roof needed to be replaced rather than repaired. The parties deposed the roofing expert, and he mentioned these findings. However, Insurance Company’s counsel objected to his mentioning those findings without a supplemental report. Appellant’s roofing expert did draft a supplemental report, but Appellant didn’t disclose it at the time.The original deadline for Appellant to disclose expert witnesses and reports was postponed, largely on stipulation of the parties, six times, and the final amended progression order set the deadline. Appellant subsequently served Insurance Company with supplemental expert reports from both of her experts. The supplemental report from Appellant’s insurance expert included updated damages calculations for each property based both on updated pricing for materials and on the inclusion of interior water damage not presented in the insurance expert's original report. The supplemental report for Appellant’s roofing expert was the as-yet-undisclosed report her roofing expert drafted addressing the core-sampling results. At that time, jury trial was set, and the supplemental reports were thus untimely not only regarding the progression order but also under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3)(B)'s requirement that such disclosures be made at least 30 days before trial. Subsequently, the trial was postponed because of Appellant's counsel's illness.Insurance Company moved to exclude the supplemental insurance and roofing experts’ reports. The district court noted that, although Appellant's disclosure was untimely under the federal rules at the time it was served, it wouldn’t exclude the reports based on this because Insurance Company had at least 30 days' notice due to the extension of the trial date. But the district court excluded any new items of damage in Appellant’s insurance expert's supplemental report, holding that it was “far too late for Appellant to raise new items of damage she has not previously claimed."The district court also excluded from the Appellant’s roofing expert’s report evidence concerning the moisture in the roof as a justification for her insistence that the roof be replaced. The district court observed that Appellant offered no credible excuse why she didn’t provide the supplemental report to Insurance Company at the time it was drafted. The lower court concluded that it would be prejudicial to Insurance Company to allow Appellant to raise a new theory on why replacement rather than repair was required because it didn’t have the opportunity to explore the moisture-in-the-roof theory of replacement during discovery. The trial judge also noted that, although the results of the roofing expert's core sample were discussed at his deposition, Insurance Company was not obligated to presume the issue of replacement due to roof moisture would be raised without a supplemental report.Appellant argued that she was so prejudiced by the incorrect exclusion of certain portions of the supplemental reports by her insurance and roofing expert that the district court should’ve granted her a new trial. Circuit Judge Clarence Beam wrote in his opinion that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f)(1)(C) allows a district court to "issue any just orders" to sanction parties for failure to follow a pretrial scheduling order and includes "prohibiting the disobedient party from . . . introducing designated matters in evidence" under Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(ii). Further, Judge Beam noted that in Patterson v. F.W. Woolworth Co. (8th Cir. 1986), the Court of Appeals stated that the factors that a court should consider in deciding whether to exclude the testimony of a witness not made known in a manner complying with a pretrial order include: (i) the reason for failing to name the witness; (ii) the importance of the witness's testimony; (iii) opposing party's required time to prepare for the testimony; and (iv) whether a continuance would be useful. These factors, the judge explained, have also been applied to supplemental expert reports disclosed later than provided for in a progression order.The Circuit Court held that the district court was within its discretion when it excluded certain portions of the supplemental expert reports and did consider the Patterson factors. As to the roofing expert’s supplemental report, the district court noted Appellant had no reason for the extreme delay of her disclosure—despite the fact that she had the report six months earlier; the lack of opportunity for Insurance Company to develop evidence and respond to the roof-moisture theory of replacement at the property; that she did not request a continuance; and that "[a] continuance at the eleventh hour was not appropriate." As to the supplemental report of her insurance expert, the district court again noted its "egregiously untimely disclosure" and observed that the new claimed damage was less than 5% of the total damages Appellant sought.Also, the Court held that Appellant wasn’t prejudiced by the exclusion of this evidence resulting in fundamental unfairness, as she could’ve called her roofing expert to support her interior-water-damage theory, which was included in both his original and supplemental reports. Appellant’s insurance expert's original report likewise presented similar opinions and even included the opinion that the roof of one of the properties needed to be replaced. The roofing expert's original report acknowledged that possibility.The Eighth Circuit agreed that the jury clearly rejected Appellant's claim to any interior damage whatsoever, and thus, the exclusion of the new items of interior damage didn’t prejudice that claim. The district court applied the law correctly under the federal rules and acted within the scope of its discretion in excluding certain portions from the supplemental expert reports. The decision was affirmed. Amplatz v. Country Mutual Insurance Company, No. 15-2645, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9540 (Cir. 8 (Minn.) May 25, 2016).
I am an Architect expert with expertise in forensic architecture and liability issues, building envelope, roofing design and failures, masonry and concrete failures and restoration, intrusive moisture problems including mold and fungal growth, and waterproofing issues. I have more than 50 years of experienc in my industry and 30 years expert witness can consulting experience.
I have more than 35 years of experience working in the construction industry with a primary focus in home inspection. I worked as a carpenter apprentice and journeyman carpenter before moving on to work as a home inspector for numerous insurance companies. I was also the founder and president of my own construction and home inspection company for 10 years. I have strong experience inspecting moisture intrusion and other types of water damage, indoor air quality, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) systems, and electrical defects. I have also worked as a firefighter and Supervising Fire Marshal. I have more than 20 years of expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have more than 40 years of experience in the field of Forensic Engineering, as a Registered Professional Engineer, with expertise in Construction Engineering. I own a consultancy that provides services with regard to construction, design, and installation defect disputes for all building types and systems. I also am President of an additional company where I am responsible for all design, construction administration, and engineering and project management. I have experience with mechanical, electrical, plumbing and fire protection engineering design and project management for institutional, industrial, health care and residential projects. I have over 10 years of expert witness experience with consultation, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have over 25 years experience as a professional engineer and licensed general contractor in consulting, design, construction project management, university teaching, and research. I specializes in structural analysis / design, damage and failure investigations, and construction defects / accidents. I have expertise in performance evaluation of constructed facilities including the effects of natural (wind, earthquake, flood, fire) and man-made (vibrations, blast and impact) hazards, damage assessment, and repair and retrofit design. Has served as an expert on small and multi-million-dollar claims. My experience includes buildings, bridges, concrete cooling towers, offshore platforms, silos, damage investigation of single and multi-family residential, commercial and historic buildings, storage tanks and underground water conduits, blast in underground coal mines, explosion in a chemical plant, effect demolition, pile driving and new construction on adjacent buildings, excessive floor vibrations, cracking, settlement, wind, fire and flooding damage, foundation distress, retaining walls, slabs and pavements, evaluation of defective concrete, terrazzo and other construction materials, water intrusion damage, contract disputes, product liability, accidents, personal injury, property damage, and failures during construction. I have more than 15 years expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have over 50 years experience as a property damage consultant with determining damage to residential / commercial property both contents and structures resulting from water, mold, bacteria, sewage, fire, smoke, or indoor air quality problems. My services include appraisal, inspection, infrared building inspections (finds hidden moisture/water intrusion), restoration, industry standards, claims analysis and investigation, concrete vapor/moisture emission testing, concrete sulfate issues, concrete inspections, textile cleaning (carpet, upholstery, draperies, and Oriental, American Indian and hand-woven rugs), and flooring forensics and inspections (wood, carpet, ceramic, resilient, and natural stone). I have more than 20 years expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have over 45 years experience as an Accredited Senior Appraiser in automotive, as well as personal property appraisal including evaluation of general residential contents following damage resulting from mold, water, or fire.
I have many years of experience as a floor covering expert specializing in hardwoods with expertise in inspections, sales, installation, sanding and finishing, adhesives, as well as water damage restoration and drying. I also have considerable experience with the calcium chloride moisture testing for concrete slabs.
I am a Building Contractor and Inspector with over 40 years of hands-on field experience. My areas of expertise include defective construction analysis, cost estimating, and construction scheduling and delays, as well as; plan and code compliance, document analysis, summaries and reports, evaluation of change order costs; estimates of repair for property loss from fire, flood, water and earthquake damage; construction management, on-site inspections, and project supervision.
I have over 40 years experience in Construction. My areas of expertise includes Building construction failure analysis, defects and damages; damage cost analysis, remediation and reconstruction; Commercial, industrial and residential; Structural and architectural concrete, including masonry, stone and tile; Foundation defects and repair; Water intrusion and mold. I have additional experience with insurance damage remediation, reconstruction, inspections, and trouble-shooting.
I have more than 40 years experience in the field of General Contracting with expertise in practical solutions to building performance issues. I have experience with foundation repair, seismic retrofitting, testing and evaluation of fire and water damage. The scope of services I am typically asked to provide includes investigation, destructive testing, windows installation, repair recommendation development, construction procedures, cost estimation, and presentation of findings in cases of construction defects, building envelope defects, insurance coverage, bad faith, failure to disclose, fraud, and criminal negligence and project mismanagement. I have over 10 years expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have more than 35 years experience in the field of Fire Protection and Safety Engineering. My expertise includes fire protection system design, installation, maintenance, operation, and failures, including: fire detection; smoke detection; fire alarm; central station; sprinkler systems – wet pipe, dry-pipe, pre-action, and mist; fire suppression systems, and smoke control; and sprinkler leakage and water damage. I have additional experience in fire and smoke barriers; building code, life safety code, and fire code compliance; fire hazard, building materials, and fire resistance ratings; fire cause and origin; vehicle fire investigation; arson; human behavior in fire conditions; means of egress, egress signage, and emergency lighting; and fire modeling. I have prior expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have more than 30 years experience in the field of Construction Law. I am a licensed attorney with extensive experience in design / build projects including field supervision of projects involving HVAC, chilled water plants, refrigeration systems, heated oil projects, heat recovery, geothermal, steam, natural gas, propane, wet/dry fire suppression, plumbing, power and control wiring for commercial, and industrial and institutional clients. I have over 25 years expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have over 40 years experience in the field of Civil, Structural, & Environmental Engineering. My areas of expertise include soil and groundwater remediation, mold, and moisture / water-related problems. I have more than 20 years expert witness experience with consultations, deposition, and courtroom testimony.
I have over 20 years of experience in building and building systems design for new construction and rehabilitations. I specialize in mechanical systems. I am responsible for system load calculations, equipment specification, workplace layout, and system layout and analysis. My projects include applications for laboratories, offices, and retail / institutional / educational spaces. I have more than 10 years expert witness experience.