Sample Project Descriptions

Colorado Springs, CO

Low speed rear impacts are quite common and can be challenging to litigate. Dr. Miller evaluates such cases in the context of industry practices and the published literature as well as the occupants’ previously diagnosed medical condition(s). Reported injuries may not match the biomechanics involved, as in this case, in which the plaintiff claimed that the low speed impact resulted in her shoulder injuries and subsequent surgeries.

Allegation: The subject accident resulted in plaintiff’s injuries to her shoulder and loss of wages.

Analysis: Analysis of low speed rear impacts, the biomechanical tolerance of the shoulder and low speed impacts in general, has indicated that these accidents are not injurious. Dr. Miller evaluated and demonstrated the biomechanics and forces involved with the alleged injuries. Similar cases have been evaluated regarding the lumbar and cervical spine.

Los Angeles, CA

Dr. Miller investigated a vehicular accident involving a sports car and a sport utility vehicle (SUV) in which the sports car was rear impacted at a very high rate of speed. The driver unfortunately lost his life. The right front passenger survived, relatively uninjured, thereby raising the issue of differential injury. Dr. Miller was retained to investigate the performance of the vehicle, including crash testing in Europe, and address plaintiff’s alternative design.

Allegation: The subject driver seat system and vehicle was defective in design, manufacture, and testing.

Analysis: Dr. Miller analyzed the design, the engineering methodologies and testing conducted by the manufacturer in relation to industry standards. The nature of the injury and fracture patterns were also analyzed. Crash testing was performed in Europe at a state-of-the-art facility to replicate the subject accident. Dr. Miller supervised the test.

Birmingham, AL

Dr. Miller was retained to investigate a vehicular accident involving a minivan and a large work truck. The accident was a front-end accident for both vehicles and occurred at a high rate of speed.

Allegation: The subject child seat was defective in design and manufacture and was inadequately tested to industry standards.

Analysis: Dr. Miller analyzed the forensic evidence as it related to restraint system performance, child seat performance, occupant kinematics and injury causation. Dr. Miller also evaluated the testing and methodology of the manufacturer and opposing experts.

Tampa, FL

Dr. Miller was asked to evaluate the biomechanics and alleged injury related to a workplace accident in which a fire extinguisher fell from a store shelf. Plaintiff alleged that the fire extinguisher fell from the shelf, struck him on the back of the head, and drove him to the floor causing traumatic brain injury (TBI). Plaintiff claimed that the incident prevented him from completing medical school.

Allegation: The subject incident resulted in plaintiff’s injuries and loss of wages.

Analysis: The subject incident was re-created using a crash test dummy. The occupant kinematics were analyzed in an engineering test where an identical fire extinguisher was dropped from a similar shelf, striking the test dummy on the back of the head.

Orlando, FL

Dr. Miller was asked to evaluate an alleged workplace accident at a large beverage bottling facility. Plaintiff alleged that a loaded pallet fell on his shoulder while performing a maintenance function. Shoulder injuries and loss of wages were at issue in the case.

Allegation: The subject incident resulted in plaintiff’s injuries and loss of wages.

Analysis: The subject incident was re-created using a surrogate of the same size as plaintiff. The scene was investigated and replicated utilizing similar layout, pallets, surrogate, and bottles. Engineering analysis was performed as to whether the forces involved in the alleged accident would have been crushing or injurious.

Jefferson, MO

Dr. Miller was asked to evaluate a side impact involving a large SUV and a rear seated child. A pickup truck sideswiped the SUV and allegedly destroyed the seatbelt mechanism. The young boy suffered traumatic head injury.

Allegation: The subject vehicle was defective in design and testing. The subject seat belt was not adequately protected from side impact.

Analysis: Dr. Miller inspected the subject vehicle and conducted analysis of the speeds involved, the position of the occupant, and the damage related to the deformation of the vehicle in relation to the outcome and whether design changes could have changed the outcome of the accident.

“Dr. Miller, I learn more from you on a vehicle and site inspection than any other expert.”
— Attorney, Dallas, TX