LM218 - Forensic Audiology: Application of the Fundamental Principles (Part 2 of 2)

Abstract:
This presentation will offer a sample of five challenging cases within the area of forensic audiology. Each of the cases will be related to various fundamental principles of forensic audiology offered in the previous presentation, Forensic Audiology I:  Principles of Forensic Audiology. The cases are a vape pen explosion, 3M product liability, a rear-end collision,  patent infringement involving rights over noise reduction/voice detection algorithms,  a wrongful death at a railroad crossing, The case discussions will present audiological expertise provided to the triers of fact as they work to arrive at a just legal settlements.

Summary::
The presentation begins with an Overview of forensic audiology, the remainder of the presentation is samples of cases that authors have seen in their work as forensic audiologists.

Case 1: Vape Pen Explosion - Dr. Dennis Colucci

The plaintiff is a 25-year-old male who acquired multiple injuries after a customer vape pen he constructed at a Vape Shop blew up in his hand during testing.  The complaint claims the plaintiff's injuries of blindness in one eye, burns about the hand and face, hearing loss, bilateral tinnitus, and hyperacusis resulted from the battery exploding. The audiometric data revealed a moderately severe high-frequency hearing loss in the right ear with a distinct noise notch and unrestricted hearing in the left ear with a slight notch. Tinnitus and hyperacusis were evaluated. Historically, the records lacked evidence of preinjury deficits. The defense expert's opinions favored the plaintiff.

Case 2: Head Injury Resulting in Deafness ... Dr. Jay Hall

The plaintiff was a 41-year-old female who complained of hearing loss and tinnitus following a minor rear-end automobile collision. Audiological assessment documented mild high-frequency sensory hearing loss for the right ear and hearing sensitivity within normal limits for the left ear. Medical records, audiological history, and plaintiff deposition revealed multiple pre-collision explanations for hearing loss and tinnitus. Plaintiff declined opportunities for formal tinnitus evaluation, and management for the hearing loss and alleged tinnitus. The jury decided a verdict against the plaintiff.

Case 3: Patent Infringement ... Dr. Tom Powers

A patent infringement dispute over rights to noise reduction and voice detection algorithms. The suit claims company X used the associated signal processing in the patents from company Y in devices being sold in the US and around the world patents covering beamforming techniques used to detect specific speech patterns were also used in the devices. Company Y requests a jury trial and injunctions against company X to import and/or sell devices based on said patents. They also claim irreparable harm and seek damages.

Case 4: 3M Product Liability Case ... Dr. Chris Spankovich

This litigation involves a product liability claim that manifested into the largest mass tort case in US history.  The presentation will provide a general overview of mass tort litigation, the Bellwether process, and the role of an audiologist as a case-specific general expert.

Case 5:  Railroad Accident Resulting in Death - Dr. Traynor

A high school teacher driving to her daughter’s house across an unguarded railroad crossing was hit by a locomotive after repeated efforts to blow the train horn. Critical factors in the case involve the intensity horn, regulations for blowing the horn, and calculations of horn intensity at various positions along the track before impact. Variables were the attention of the driver and, the intensity of masking noises inside the vehicle. A wrap-up indicating that the types of cases vary and that they can be challenging, Interesting, and a method of enhancing justice by the use of the audiologist's broad scope of practice.