The May 2003 issue of Concrete International Magazine from ACI has an article "Judging Building Codes" and the December 2003 issue has a number of letters regarding the article. It is a very interesting and lively discussion over the clarity of building codes from the engineer's, contractor's and ATTORNEY's points of view. It is worth reading.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TugboatEng on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Concrete International Magazine Article 1
- Thread starter jheidt2543
- Start date
-
1
- #2
BryanStein
Structural
Agreed that it has been very interesting reading. It is difficult, however, (as is often is when attorneys are involved) to tell which side is actually telling the truth ... or reporting the full story.
It appears to me that the judges decision was dictated not by the facts of the case, but by the skill of the litigators. Truly a disservice to the entire engineering profession.
Another possibility is that the judge, not being capable to follow and understand ALL of the facts, only latched onto a few facts of the case that HE considered key concepts. Consequently, the judges decision was likely based upon an incomplete understanding of all of the issues ... as presented by an attorney with no engineering background.
Cases such as these should be decided by a three member board of professional piers in the industry who are familiar with the local standard of care. Anything else will just lead to erroneous decisions.
It appears to me that the judges decision was dictated not by the facts of the case, but by the skill of the litigators. Truly a disservice to the entire engineering profession.
Another possibility is that the judge, not being capable to follow and understand ALL of the facts, only latched onto a few facts of the case that HE considered key concepts. Consequently, the judges decision was likely based upon an incomplete understanding of all of the issues ... as presented by an attorney with no engineering background.
Cases such as these should be decided by a three member board of professional piers in the industry who are familiar with the local standard of care. Anything else will just lead to erroneous decisions.
- Thread starter
- #3
jheidt2543
Civil/Environmental
BrianStein,
I agree. It seems if an attorney can't convice'm with facts, he baffels them with bull____.
It would be interesting to see if engineering societies like NSPE and ASCE would be willing to set up the panels you suggest. The alternative is to go to binding arbitration clauses in design and construction disputes. It would have to be cheaper in the long run and it would ensure a hearing by knowlegable experts in the industry.
I agree. It seems if an attorney can't convice'm with facts, he baffels them with bull____.
It would be interesting to see if engineering societies like NSPE and ASCE would be willing to set up the panels you suggest. The alternative is to go to binding arbitration clauses in design and construction disputes. It would have to be cheaper in the long run and it would ensure a hearing by knowlegable experts in the industry.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question