Forensic Weather Consultants is pleased to announce that a complex wind-created opening claim that has been in suit for the past 5 years was voluntarily dismissed by the Plaintiff. Forensic Weather Consultants was retained on behalf of a defendant insurance carrier in Florida and demonstrated through reliable weather data and sound, scientific analyses that the weather and wind conditions that the Plaintiff’s engineer contended had occurred were in fact inaccurate and incorrect. Forensic Weather Consultants prepared a Rule-26 expert report, a rebuttal report of the plaintiff’s engineer, an affidavit showing why the plaintiff’s engineers’ findings were incorrect and how they inaccurately concluded that a tornado and high winds moved over the property.
According to Howard Altschule, CEO and Certified Consulting Meteorologist of Forensic Weather Consultants, “using Doppler radar imagery zoomed in over the incident location, storm reports and a confirmed tornado storm survey track, we were able to prove that strong winds let alone a tornado did not occur at the property.” The plaintiff’s engineer opined that a confirmed tornado occurred but our careful analysis and a review of the engineering report that they provided showed that the tornado’s actual width was so small that it could not have have affected the property several miles away. That would imply that the tornado was around 3 miles wide in Florida. Doppler radar velocity images also showed that the strong wind circulation came nowhere near the property.
A successful Daubert Challenge of the engineer was filed by the insurance carrier and confirmed by the court. The case was ultimately voluntarily dismissed.
(Note: The Courthouse photo does not necessarily mean this was a Monroe County case).
This month’s (January 2021) issue of Claims and Litigation Management Alliance magazine contains an article that was written by Howard Altschule of Forensic Weather Consultant and Staff Counsel Jennifer Brooks from GuideOne Insurance. The article discusses Slip and Fall on Snow/Ice claims and details the importance of having reliable weather data, occasional errors and misconceptions in the NOAA weather records, and how retaining a Forensic Meteorologist can be useful to your team. Attorney Brooks also references several cases that were resolved with the assistance of weather experts, reports and affidavits. The January 2021 Magazine Article Can be Found Here
“Plaintiff also raised factual issues in her opposing papers concerning the climatological data, submitting the affidavit of a meteorologist (Howard Altschule), who opines that counsel for the defendant relied upon records from Farmingdale, nine miles from the accident site, and not from Centerport, which is located only 2 miles from the accident site.” “This raises a factual issue of the existence of an icy condition for a sufficient period of time to give the defendant constructive notice so that it could prevent the dangerous condition that allegedly caused plaintiff to fall.”
Court Decision Denying Motion for Summary Judgement Can Be Found Here
Bronx Supreme Court recently granted a Motion for Summary Judgement dismissing a premises liability claim stemming from a slip and fall on “black ice.” The decision by the court referenced the work done by Meteorologists Howard Altschule, Dillon Turner, and John Lombardo. CEO Howard Altschule stated “The goal at Forensic Weather Consultants is to provide the most accurate and reliable meteorological analyses, Rule 26 expert reports, and affidavits so our clients (whether plaintiff or defense) can make informed decisions. Our client in this matter understand the value of our work and they are great clients to work with.”
Read the Bronx Supreme Court decision Here
You can learn more about our work on these cases by visiting our “Slip and Fall” page.
In December 2020, Howard Altschule was asked to author an article discussing the importance of having the correct date of loss.
Read the Magazine Article Here
You can learn more about our work on these cases by visiting our “Wind and Tornado Claims” or “Hail Claims” pages under Sample Reports.
The court also credits the Defendants’ expert in meteorology, Howard Altschule, who testified that a photo depicting the area shortly after Mr. Duffy’s fall showed ice on the walkway (Plaintiff’s exhibit 5). In viewing the phot of the area, Dr. Altschule testified, “it looks like everything is covered with ice to me” and “it looks like a very icy area everywhere”.
Supreme Court Decision Granting a Motion for Summary Judgement Can Be Found Here
In March 2020, Forensic Weather Consultants published an article in CLAIMS Magazine discussing the importance of using reliable weather experts, technology, and weather data to resolve insurance claims and lawsuits. In this article, we discuss recurring issues with engineers doing their own weather research, errors in the raw NOAA data that meteorologists can catch, and frequent problems encountered with some automated hail vendor products.
Read the March 2020 CLAIMS Article Here
Here, in support of their motion, defendants submit the sworn affidavit of Howard Altschule, a Certified Consulting Meteorologist, who relies upon official weather records and climatological data in support of his opinion that the snow and ice on the ground on the date of the accident were the result of a winter storm, consisting of snow and freezing rain, that fell from approximately 2:00 A.M. to 3:30 P.M. that day. According to Altschule, the storm caused an inch of snow and 1/10th of an inch of ice to accumulate over the period, with occasional brief lulls.
Supreme Court Decision Granting a Motion for Summary Judgement Can Be Found Here
The Government offers the forensic weather report of certified consulting meteorologist Howard Altschule to show there was a storm in progress at the time of Plaintiff’s fall. (“Altschule Report”) and (“Altschule Affidavit”). The Altschule Report reveals that approximately twenty inches of snow fell in the Tillson area on February 13 and 14, 2014, resulting in twenty-six inches of snow on the ground on the morning of February 15. Additionally, a melting and refreezing process occurred in the early morning hours of February 15, which caused new ice to form overnight. New snow fell throughout February 15, beginning at approximately 5:05 AM. New York courts have explained that evidence of a storm in progress “is especially persuasive when based upon the analysis of a licensed meteorologist,” such as Altschule.