decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
ordinary person | 154 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Re: ordinary person
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 19 2012 @ 04:17 PM EDT
Any person who believe that truthfulness is better than hubris.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

ordinary person
Authored by: artp on Monday, August 20 2012 @ 01:29 PM EDT
I don't mind claiming to be an ordinary person. It's all
relative, isn't it? There are groups where I look like an
expert, and groups where I take notes.

The problem that I see with this strategy is that expert
witnesses are supposed to be more than ordinary. I suspect
that an "ordinary" person would be challenged by the
opposition and disqualified before they could testify.

It has happened to me in a courtroom before. Testimony was
on the source of a fire. All you had to do was add up power
draw and show that there were too many gadgets on the line.
It's a basic operation taught to ALL freshmen engineering
students. A licensed electrician could do it just as well,
or better than some. Anybody who could add could have seen
that the totals were too high even if they didn't know about
the power factor. But the court insists on an electrical
engineer, with over four (five? it's been a while) years of
experience who has
passed the Engineer-in-Training (EIT) test and the
Professional Engineering test, and who is paid up on their
licensing fees in the state where the legal action is being
contested. Unless you are employed by a large firm who also
employs a Chief Engineer who fits the above statement.

I was just a Registered Professional Engineer in Mechanical
Engineering licensed in two states who had been responsible
for electrical, electro-pneumatic and electro-hydraulic
instruments used in oil refineries, power plants and
chemical plants. No expert in that courtroom. I got a
chuckle out of it. I was good enough for safety systems on
the North Slope of Alaska or in a nuclear power plant, but
not good enough for a trailer fire. The law needs to get in
touch with reality.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )