|
|
A monthly publication from the Wisconsin Society of Professional Engineers
June 1, 2007 Edition
1. |
|
2. |
WSPE’s 2007 Governors New Product Awards (GNPA) Ceremony and Banquet |
3. |
|
4. |
|
5. |
WSPE's President Corner |
|
As we hit the last month of the WSPE program year—June—summer
is upon us and I find myself writing the last president’s
message of my term. For 2006-2007, our society had some good success,
while some challenges remain in the future.
A couple of tools were put into place this year to achieve the second goal of better continuity from year to year:
After several years of difficulty, 2006-2007 was a year the society
moved forward, and I believe a foundation was laid, poising us to
achieve major accomplishments this coming year. Our executive director
Nancy Short has done a great job since she came
on board and has now been around for more than one program year,
allowing us to advance again. Jim Buggs really
stepped up to the plate this year, making major contributions on
almost every key program we worked on. Our past president Dale
Chlebowski remained very active this year and came up with
a great slate of officers for next year. What’s really exciting
is the incoming executive committee for next year, with Jim Buggs
at the helm as president and several new officers who have demonstrated
strong leadership and efforts in their chapters: Tracy Pinkowski,
Chris Stamborski, Chad O’Donnell,
plus Matt Richards and John Parisi
returning. Robb Peebles |
|
WSPE’s 2007 Governors New Product Awards (GNPA) Ceremony and Banquet |
|
| On April 19, 2007, over 100 people attended WSPE’s 26th Annual GNPA ceremony and banquet, which was preceded by the WSPE Discovery Conference, past president’s reception. The banquet was held at the Sheraton Milwaukee Brookfield Hotel and was emceed by Tom Zalaski, WFRV-TV News Anchor, Green Bay, WI. Tom did an excellent job of announcing all the awards winners and provided us with a humorous viewpoint from his side of the camera.
Our keynote speaker, Aaron D. Olver, Deputy Secretary, from the Wisconsin Department of Commerce, talked about the importance of supporting new product development in Wisconsin. We were very fortunate to have the Deputy Secretary in attendance. WSPE appreciates the support we get from the Governor’s office and the Department of Commerce. Also in attendance were our 2007 State MATHCOUNTS winners. Their award was presented to each of them by Robb A. Peebles, P.E., WSPE State President.
The following is a list of 1st place winners in each employment category: Small Company (50 or fewer employees)
Medium Company (51 to 200 employees)
Large Company (201 to 9999 employees)
Mega Company (10,000 or more employees)
I would like to thank the following people: WSPE State Board members; WSPE GNPA judges; Jerry Bizjak, P.E. (GNPA plaques/certificates); Laura Swenson, President, Music Dynamics (Phototgrapher); Nancy Short, CMP, WSPE Executive Director (Registration, Programs); Christopher Roper, TEI (Registration). This fall, refer to our state website for information about next year’s 2008 GNPA competition. Dale R. Swenson, P.E. |
|
Must Professional Engineers be Registered in
the State of the Court Where They are to Give Expert Testimony? |
|
| While it may not be a burning issue with professional engineers, the question is out there: Must a professional engineer be licensed in the state in which he or she acts as an expert consultant or expert witness, or both? Wisconsin defines professional engineering in § 443.01(6) in the Wisconsin Statutes:
Forensic work and expert testimony reasonably falls within the definition of “professional engineering.” Section 443.02(1) and (2) provide:
Practicing professional engineering in Wisconsin without being registered pursuant to Chapter 443 of the Wisconsin Statutes constitutes a criminal act under § 443.18(1), and if any person or the examining board desires, they may bring in the name and on behalf of the state of Wisconsin an action to enjoin the unlicensed professional engineer from continuing the unlicensed professional service. There are no reported Wisconsin decisions holding that a professional engineer performing forensic work or providing expert testimony must be registered in Wisconsin. However, lawyers using professional engineers as expert witnesses or consultants have called upon professionals from other states to provide such services in Wisconsin, even though the professional engineer is not registered as a professional engineer in Wisconsin. This practice is primarily due to the fact that a separate chapter of the Wisconsin Statutes, Chapter 907, provides the authority for using expert opinions and testimony. Under § 907.02 of the Wisconsin Statutes, if scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the court or jury to understand the evidence or determine a fact at issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify by expressing an expert opinion. Nothing is said in that statute about the expert being licensed or registered in the state of Wisconsin. Under § 907.03 the facts or data upon which an expert relies may be those perceived by the expert at or before the hearing. The facts or data need not even be in evidence and need not be previously disclosed to the opposing party unless the court requires otherwise. However, it is common for the courts to order the exchange of expert witness curriculum vitae and opinions during discovery. The parties may bring the expert witness’ credentials and opinions to the court for evaluation before trial by appropriate motions. The court ultimately has the responsibility of either admitting or denying the expert’s opinions into evidence. In determining whether or not to admit the expert’s opinions, an objection can certainly be made that the expert should not be permitted to express engineering opinions because that expert is not registered as a professional engineer in Wisconsin. A similar objection can be made in another state when a Wisconsin registered professional engineer is engaged in forensic work or expert testimony in another state. While there is not a great deal of law on this subject, in 2006 the Supreme Courts of South Carolina, Illinois and Alabama issued decisions relating to whether or not a professional engineer licensing statute precludes the expert testimony of an engineer not licensed in the state where the testimony is given. The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s ruling preventing the witness from testifying even though the South Carolina statutes defining “practice of engineering” included “expert technical testimony.” The South Carolina Supreme Court felt that the definition of professional engineering was in conflict with the South Carolina rules of evidence which were similar to Wisconsin’s, and gave precedent to the rules of evidence. The Supreme Court of Illinois held that the lack of an Illinois license to practice civil engineering did not prevent a civil engineer licensed in the District of Columbia from giving expert testimony in Illinois. The Illinois Supreme Court also held that whether the expert testimony was admissible was an issue for the Illinois rules of evidence, not for the statute’s licensing of professional engineers. On the other hand, the Alabama Supreme Court addressed a 1997 amendment to the Alabama Statutes which added the word “testimony” to the definition of “practice of engineering.” The Alabama Supreme Court reversing the trial court held that an engineer testifying as to the negligent design, construction, operation and maintenance of a sanitary sewer system must be licensed in the state of Alabama in order to be admitted into evidence. In all three of the state proceedings in South Carolina, Illinois and Alabama, the question could or likely did arise as to sanctions against the professional engineer for giving expert testimony and consultation without being registered in the forum state. In the Illinois case, the Supreme Court of Illinois acknowledged that an engineer who testified in Illinois without a license may be committing a criminal violation. While that litigation was pending, the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation issued a cease and desist order against the expert. Consequently, that expert was placed between a rock and a hard place by facing a criminal act for giving expert testimony which the Illinois Supreme Court held was admissible. No doubt the issue will eventually arise in Wisconsin involving a professional engineer and become the subject of a written appellate decision. In 2001, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals rejected the contention that a psychologist licensed only in Indiana should be prohibited from giving expert testimony in Wisconsin, citing § 907.02, the Wisconsin rules of evidence. For now, it is evident that a Wisconsin professional engineer giving expert consultation or testimony on engineering issues in another state where he or she is not licensed should be aware of the potential dangerous consequences and should seek registration immediately upon undertaking the assignment for the lawyer. It should be relatively easy to obtain licensing by reciprocity, but easy or not, the need should not be overlooked. Attorney Robert J. Kay is the senior partner in the law firm of Kay & Andersen, S.C. and devotes his time to representing professional engineers, architects, contractors, material suppliers and owners of construction projects. Please feel free to contact him at (608) 833-0077 or at rjkay@kayandandersen.com. |
|
Welcome New Members |
|
| Timothy J. Miller, P.E. Daniel G. Mortensen |
|
2007 Dates to Remember |
|
Leadership Conference NSPE Annual Conference For a complete listing of local and national events please go to: |
|
