Latest News

Forensic Investigation of Battery Failures

Source: Brad Davis, PE, Assistant Technical Director Electrical/Mechanical, Envista Forensics

With the ever-increasing use of batteries and battery-powered devices, it is becoming inevitable that a fire area of origin will include some sort of battery. The question then becomes, did the battery or battery powered device cause the fire, and how do forensic investigators approach these fires where a battery is involved? In common situations like this, there are specific steps and approaches that assist investigators in the determination of whether batteries were involved in the ignition of a fire.

The Steps to a Successful Investigation

Step 1: Determining the Correct Area of Origin

Ensuring the fire area of origin is correct is the first key component in a fire investigation and requires the involvement of a knowledgeable and experienced fire investigator. A crucial component of this step is an accurate interview of the insured and insured parties in the space for additional information that will help in the examination. This would need to include the identification of the fire’s area of origin, if known, as well as any information the insured may have on the items in the area, modifications to those items, changes in operation, and their last known condition. This could include receipts, photographs of the items, and documents on the make and model or serial number.

The early identification of all electronic components and manufactures ensures the proper parties can be place on notice. If the area of origin is incorrect or items are misidentified, pieces of evidence critical to the determination of the cause of fire may be missed.

Step 2: Collecting Sufficient Evidence

During a fire investigation, it is important to ensure that a sufficient amount of evidence is collected. Often times, when Lithium-Ion cells vent due to overcharging or overheating of the battery, they can explode and expel their contents a surprisingly long distance. If the area of origin is constrained and collection is too tight, those contents, and the evidence needed to determine if the battery cell was the cause of the fire or just a victim of a fire started elsewhere, may be missed.

The other issue is those ejected contents can sometimes appear to be the origin of the fire since the contents are hot and can ignite materials in the area that they land. In some instances, there are multiple apparent areas of origin and can be areas even over 12-feet from the battery powered device. At that point, interviews with personnel in the area at the initiation of the event are crucial to the identification of the device that caused the fire.

Step 3: Collecting the Right Evidence

When collecting evidence, investigators must be sure they are collecting the correct items. One suitable method is to grid and collect all debris in a preselected area. This will lead to a higher degree of recovery of the ejected materials and cell components but will also lead to the collection, moving, and sifting of large amounts of debris. In some cases, debris is sifted through on scene, which allows for less material and debris to be collected but generates risk of leaving small critical pieces behind.

The Make Up of Battery Cells

Now that the evidence is collected, sifted, and the battery pack and cell components are recovered and identified, how do those pieces of evidence indicate whether the battery pack, battery powered device, or cell caused the fire? To better understand and answer this common question forensic investigators have to ask themselves, let’s talk about cell construction, chemistry, and what happens when these components start operating outside of their desired design.

Battery Cell

The basic component of a battery pack is a cell – the assembly of foil, electrodes, separators, electrolytes, and containers that allows the storage of electrical energy in a chemical form. Each battery chemistry is slightly different, and the individual components may be of a different chemical composition, but each cell will have these components.

In some cases, such as with Lithium-Polymer (Li-Po), the battery cells are a subset of a more general family of Lithium-Ion. Li-Po batteries will have a polymer separator and often have a square, rectangular, or prismatic case construction, rather than a metal canister of the typical Lithium-Ion cells. A very common Lithium-Ion cell is referred to as an 18650, which refers to a cylindrical canister with a diameter of 18mm and a length of 65mm. This metal canister will have some added protective devices built into the top of the cylindrical canister.

Battery Pack

An assembly of cells is referred to as a battery pack. The common battery chemistry that forensic engineers investigate, Lithium-Ion, requires the cells to operate in a very tight set of parameters. The voltage cannot be too high or too low, the current cannot be too great, and the temperature must be controlled. All of these parameters are critical, as battery packs or cells can suffer from a thermal runaway event and start a fire if they start operating outside their safe parameters. In order to prevent this, battery management systems are put in place to ensure that a cell or collection of cells operate in their design parameters.

Battery management systems need to be designed such that all the cells are within the desired parameters. Some manufacturers put battery management systems within the battery pack, some within the device using power from the battery, some within the device charging the battery, and some in both the battery and the device. 

When shortcuts are made within a system, the state of individual cells cannot be accurately determined. Thus, it is important to determine if the failure occurred within the cell, the management system on the battery, or the management system in the device. This information is critical because it is possible that all of these components are made by different manufacturers or suppliers and the appropriate parties should be put on notice. For example, a major name brand notebook computer may have an off-brand battery purchased by the insured. This information should be known before the destructive examination.

In many cases, a battery failure is a brief event and by itself won’t cause a fire to spread. There needs to be a fuel nearby that can be ignited by the temperatures and duration of the heat from a battery failure. This nearby fuel can be almost anything and can be identified through good analysis, good interviews of the insured, and chemical analysis. In some cases, the fire’s fuel can be relatively obvious, such as a couch, but in others, a material is suspected but not necessarily known. Nearby materials suspected of being fuel to the fire can be identified using methods like FTIR. Once the material is identified, the properties of that material can be determined whether is it a sufficient fuel source to have caused the fire to spread.

 

Nuclear Verdicts: Leveraging Data-Driven Insights and Transparent Technology to Mitigate Risks

Source: Litify

Nuclear Verdicts, cases in which the jury rewards a significantly disproportionate amount to what was expected, have seen an exponential increase over the last few years thanks to plaintiffs' counsel implementation of tactics like reptile theory and social inflation. How can defense counsel fight back? What strategies and approaches can be taken to combat the rise of nuclear verdicts? 

At LitiQuest Insurance hosted by Litify, Themis's own Howard Klar joined like-minded professionals from Acceptance Insurance, Tyson & Mendes, and National General Insurance/ ClaimsTech to discuss a more analytical path forward for defense counsel. 

Catch the full session here, and check out the LitiQuest Insurance website for more engaging content from the summit. 

 

Habitual Drunkards in Legal Cases

Author: Robert J. Marcello, Ph.D., LCP, CCHP – Behavioral Health Expert

Source: Exigent Forensic Consulting

A Habitual Drunkard has been defined as: “A person given to ebriety or the excessive use of intoxicating drink, who has lost the power or the will, by frequent indulgence, to control his appetite for it” (1).  And similarly: “One who has the habit of indulging in intoxicating liquors so firmly fixed that he becomes intoxicated as often as the temptation is presented by his being in the vicinity where liquors are sold” (2).

Per the American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), a diagnosis of Alcohol Use Disorder includes criteria such as: “A problematic pattern of alcohol use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress”; consumption of alcohol “in larger amounts or over a longer period than was intended”; a “persistent desire” for alcohol; craving to use alcohol; recurrent and/or continued use of alcohol resulting in impairment of social, occupational, or interpersonal functioning; tolerance; and withdrawal (3).

While the DSM-5 does not specifically use the term habitual drunkard among the diagnostic criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder, an individual who can be described as a habitual drunkard according to the above definitions, would also meet the criteria for a DSM-5 diagnosis of Alcohol Use Disorder.  It is important to note, however, that Alcohol Use Disorder criteria that are consistent with addiction to alcohol must be met in order for an individual to be considered a habitual drunkard. Examples of these criteria are craving, tolerance, and withdrawal.

The concepts of Habitual Drunkard and Alcohol Use Disorder can be significant factors in a variety of legal cases including, but not limited to Dram Shop, Driving Under the Influence (DUI), wrongful death, and personnel matters.  Such cases routinely involve forensic consultants with expertise in areas such as Dram Shop and Toxicology, however, Clinical Psychologists can also play a significant role in these cases.

For example, in a hypothetical case involving a visibly intoxicated individual leaving a bar, operating a motor vehicle, and causing a motor vehicle accident resulting in the death or injury of a second individual, a Dram Shop Expert may be retained address elements such as staff training and over service.  In addition, a Toxicology Expert can address elements such as alcohol intoxication and impairment, blood and urine levels of alcohol, and alcohol abuse and misuse.  A clinical psychologist could also be involved in such a case in that a clinical psychologist could formally determine whether the driver who caused the accident met the diagnostic criteria of Alcohol Use Disorder, including criteria consistent with addiction to alcohol, thereby also meeting the standard of habitual drunkard.  Such diagnostic information could then be used to support and strengthen the opinions of the Dram Shop and Toxicology Experts.

Exigent Forensic Consulting has experts in the areas of Dram Shop, Toxicology, and Clinical Psychology, and we are prepared to assist you with cases requiring expertise in any or all of these areas.  If you’d like to discuss your exact needs and learn more about how Exigent can help, reach out to our Business Development expert (Larry Wolf: 312-972-050, [email protected]).

Citations

  1. Definition of HABITUAL DRUNKARD • Law Dictionary • TheLaw.com
  2. Definition of HABITUAL DRUNKARD • Law Dictionary • TheLaw.com
  3. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2013, pgs. 490-491

 

 

SJC Clarifies the Proper Measure of Damages for Wage Act Violations

Source: Melick & Porter, LLP

The SJC recently issued an opinion in Reuter v. City of Methuen regarding the proper measure of damages for violations under the Commonwealth’s Wage Act. The Plaintiff had worked as a custodian for the City of Methuen’s school department for 25 years when she was convicted of larceny in 2013. The City formally terminated her on March 7, 2013. The Plaintiff had accrued $8,952.15 in unused vacation time at the time of her termination. The City sent to the Plaintiff payment for her unused vacation time on March 28, 2013. The Plaintiff unsuccessfully challenged her termination before the Civil Service Commission and appealed to the Superior Court. While the appeal was pending, Plaintiff’s counsel sent to the City a demand for $23,872.40 representing a trebling of late vacation pay, plus $5,986.10 for attorney’s fees. The City sent the Plaintiff a check for $185.42, representing a trebling of the twelve percent annual interest on the Plaintiff’s vacation pay accrued during the three weeks between her termination on March 7 and payment by the City on March 28. The Plaintiff sued to recover the difference between her $23,872.40 demand and the City’s $185.42 payment. The trial court found that the Plaintiff was entitled only to treble twelve percent interest for the three-week delay in receiving her vacation pay, which she had already received. The trial court also found that the Plaintiff was entitled to attorney’s fees totaling over $88,000. The City appealed from the award of attorney’s fees and the Plaintiff cross-appealed the determination that she was not entitled to recover treble lost wages. The SJC transferred the appeals on its own motion.

The Massachusetts Wage Act, M.G.L. c. 149, § 148, requires that employees who are terminated are paid in full on the day of their discharge, and includes within its definition of “wages” any holiday or vacation payments. The SJC commented that the statute “leaves no wiggle room” and that prompt payment is necessary regardless of whether the failure to make prompt payment is intentional or not. M.G.L. c. 149, § 150 permits employees who are not paid in full and on time to bring a private action for injunctive relief, damages incurred, and any lost wages and other benefits. The SJC held that “lost wages” encompasses all late payments under the Wage Act, including unpaid accrued vacation pay. The statute permitting the private cause of action further provides that the employee “shall be awarded treble damages, as liquidated damages, for any lost wages and benefits.”

The SJC rejected the trial court’s finding that the Plaintiff was entitled to treble twelve percent interest for the delay in receiving her vacation pay because such an interpretation was not supported by the language of the Wage Act and was incongruent with its purpose. The SJC noted that there is no language in § 150 suggesting that the payment of interest is the proper remedy for a violation of the act and that the statute demands prompt payment of wages to employees who rely on such payments to pay for rent and other necessities. Therefore, the SJC found that “much more is therefore at stake than the loss of the time value and depreciation of sums owed” and that the remedy for late payment is not the trebling of the interest on those wages but the trebling of the wages themselves. The SJC remanded to the trial court the question of whether the Plaintiff could be compensated for some or all of her attorney’s fees, a portion of which was incurred in unsuccessful class certification.

 

The SJC’s Reuter decision serves as an important reminder to employers that plan to terminate employees to prepare for disbursement of all final wage payments before terminating the employee. Employers must also keep in mind that the term “wages” under the Wage Act is broad and includes accrued holiday and vacation payments. Employers should also note that the strict payment requirements under the Act for employees who are terminated are relaxed for employees who voluntarily resign their employment. In those instances, the Wage Act requires that employees are paid in full on the following regular payday or, in the absence of a regular payday, on the following Saturday.

If you have any questions regarding the SJC’s Reuters decision, the Wage Act, or any other employment-related inquiry, please contact our firm’s Employment Law Practices Group at (617) 523-6200.

 

 

Holly Rogers named to Ladder Down Class of 2022!

Source: Melick & Porter, LLP

Melick & Porter is pleased to announce its Diamond Level sponsorship of Ladder Down, a program that empowers women lawyers to excel through leadership, business development, and mentoring opportunities.

M&P’s very own Holly Rogers has been selected to participate in this valuable career enrichment program. Holly is one of just 24 talented women lawyers in the Ladder Down Class of 2022.

Ladder Down is a phenomenal program founded by two female attorneys, and we encourage law firms committed to the support of women lawyers everywhere to consider supporting its efforts.

 
<< first < Prev 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next > last >>

Page 17 of 32