Phone: (775) 443-5529

[email protected]

How I Work

How I Build an Expert Opinion

Attorneys can't evaluate the quality of an expert's report until after they've retained the expert. This page is meant to fix that — to show how I actually work before you make the call.

Schedule a Consultation

IMAGE — Randy to insert: professional packaging image (palletized corrugated product, box on a compression tester, or a warehouse aisle)

My Process

Establish the standard of care.

Most packaging, warehousing, and load-securement matters do not turn on a lab test — they turn on how the work should have been done. I establish the applicable standard of care from how competent companies in the industry actually operate: the requirements and specifications that shippers, manufacturers, and retailers impose on their own operations; the guidance and recommended practices of industry associations; and, for powered equipment, OSHA. There is often no single regulation dictating, for example, how a load must be palletized — but there is a well-established body of company requirements and industry practice that defines what competent operators do.

Review the record against that standard.

I work through the depositions, discovery, photographs, videos, specifications, and shipping documents and compare what was actually done to what a competent operator in that industry does. Most failures I see come down to bad judgment, human error, poor processes, or improper palletization, loading, or handling — not defective materials.

Apply engineering knowledge where the physical facts require it.

Where the physics matters, I apply established engineering knowledge — the Fibre Box Handbook, the McKee formula for box compression, load-distribution and weight-balance analysis, and stacking, overhang, and unit-load principles — to explain what the packaging or the load could and could not withstand.

Test only when a matter genuinely calls for it.

I do not routinely test product. In the rare matter where physical testing is warranted, I know and can apply the recognized methods (ASTM, ISTA, TAPPI, FEFCO) and can measure exemplars against specification. But testing is the exception; in most cases the failure is explained by practice and judgment, not by material that would fail a test.

State each opinion to a reasonable degree of professional certainty — and no further.

I address causation as the evidence supports it, distribute it where it belongs, concede what should be conceded, and do not offer legal conclusions. Every opinion is tied to the specific evidence and the specific standard of care behind it.

The Basis for My Opinions

My opinions rest on the recognized standard of care in these industries — how competent companies actually require and perform the work — supported where needed by engineering knowledge. The principal sources:

Company requirements & specifications

The loading, palletizing, unitizing, storage, and handling requirements that shippers, manufacturers, and major retailers impose on their own operations and their vendors — often the clearest evidence of the expected standard.

Industry association guidance & recommended practices

The recommended practices and guidance published by the relevant packaging, material-handling, and transportation associations, which define what competent operators in the field do.

OSHA

Federal workplace-safety requirements governing powered industrial trucks (forklifts) and, where applicable, pallet jacks and related material handling.

Engineering knowledge

The Fibre Box Handbook, the McKee formula for box compression, and established load-distribution, stacking, and unit-load principles.

Recognized test methods (when a matter requires testing)

ASTM, ISTA, TAPPI, and FEFCO methods — known and available, but rarely the cause of failure and used only when a specific matter calls for it.

In the great majority of these cases, the failure is explained by judgment, process, and practice — not by material that would fail a laboratory test.

An Illustrative Excerpt

From one of my expert reports, with case-identifying details removed.

When transporting cargo that can move if it is not restrained — pipe, coil, paper rolls stored with the eye to the side, logs, or wheeled equipment without engaged brakes or a locking mechanism — the load must remain secured until the moment it is physically captured by the equipment removing it. Releasing the restraint before the material-handling equipment has positive control of the load transfers the entire hazard onto the person standing nearest the load.

That is the level of specificity I bring to every opinion: a clear rule of practice, drawn from how competent operators actually work, applied to the facts of the case.