Settlement Reached on Minnesota Bridge Collapse

Following the dramatic collapse of the bridge in 2007, the engineering firm responsible has agreed to pay the victims families $52.7 million.  A total of thirteen people were killed in the collapse, which occurred at the height of rush hour.  Oddly, the engineering firm who was responsible for the bridge’s inspection stated that the payment did not constitute an admission of responsibility.  Sure.  I know a lot of clients who would pay $52.7 million for something outside their zone of responsibility.

Engineering Malpractice - Generally

Engineering malpractice: results of the failure of engineering firms to meet the standard of care in their participation either in the inspection, evaluation, or design of buildings, structures, or roads.  For many engineering firms, their inspections are limited by the science and technology available to them.  In such cases, they attempt to limit their opinions to the information they can actually perceive, and state that they are not responsible for their limited access to the complete structure.  While I am not aware of the specific scientific issues associated with this disaster, I am certain many of the problems would be associated with the testing methods available.  For example, if you are testing the concrete to assure its ability to withstand the loading of rush hour in Minnesota, you would not destroy the bridge to see if it is strong enough.  Instead, you collect samples of the materials and conduct testing on the samples.  You could not, even if you wanted to, test the entire expanse. 

Juries and Technical Cases

As a lawyer who has both represented engineering and has sued them, these matters are complicated and highly technical.  In that context, many of these cases settle due to nothing more than the fact the lawyers acknowledge their inability to present these facts to a jury.  I noted in the article that the case settled right before the court considered permitting the families to seek punitive damages.  It may have simply been a business decision to settle, given the enormous impact a hundred million dollar loss would cause at an engineering firm and its insurance company.  For information about engineering litigation, involving matters of malpractice or misfeasance, request your no-obligation, free case evaluation or contact Corless Zinober, Florida Trial Lawyers, at 866-969-2889.