4/20/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

� s � TO: Board of DATE: FILE: April 12, 1983 County Commissioners SUBJECT: Reinhold vs. Indian River County vs, :;onnell, Metcalf & Eddy, !enc. FROM: Gary M. Brandenburg REFERENCES: County Attorney Judge Vocelle has scheduled this case as No. 1 on the docket for jury trial commencing September 7, 1983. It is now necessary for the County to determine the extent of expert testimony we will offer the court and jury in support of our position. In many con- struction contract cases the strength of the expert witness' testimony plays a large role in the final outcome. The court has indicated that it will not permit any party to offer more than two experts on each topic subject to expert testimony. The County has two options in this regard. The County may rely on totally local expertise in the West Palm Beach, Miami or Vero Beach area,. This alternative will probably result in a cost of between $4,000 and $6,000. The other alternative would be to retain a nationally recognized consulting firm. The cost of this later alternative will be substantially greater. Consequently, it is necessary to determine whether the use of a national firm will likely result in a cost savings outcome that will in the long run offset the added cost of the national firm. Mr. Young, the County's special counsel in this case, recommends that Indian River County retain Hill International, a nationally recognized Consulting firm with offices in New Jersey and Philadelphia, to conduct an initial review of our case and there- after to help us determine whether retaining their services would be financially feasible considering the magnitude of the claims involved. The cost of such an initial review would be approxi- mately $1,000. This would include a trip to Vero Beach by one of the firm's junior members to review the case. I would recommend that the County proceed with Mr. Young's suggestion. Attorney Brandenburg commented that he would not want Hill International to work for the County if their fees are too high, and they, in turn, don't want to work for us if the case is not of large enough magnitude to justify their expenses. They, therefore, assign a junior member to evaluate the case. What they would be doing for us is providing us with consulting expert witnesses for trial and a computer program of the construction schedule for the Administration Building and the Courthouse. They would include each possibility that arose during construction, and that would give us at trial a means of APR- 2 0 1983 65 N09( 53 FACE ?93