Brooks Hilliard has been a consulting and/or testifying expert in more than 50 cases
involving computer systems alleged to have software defects, faulty operation,
and/or defective performance (engaged by counsel for both users and
vendors). These assignments
have involved some of the industry's largest software developers. Attorney
references are available on request.
Issues have covered software and/or system deficiencies, unreliable software and
defective functionality, including matters involving installation, implementation,
customization and development services provided by software firms and
independent contractors. Representative engagements include:
Testified for a wholesale distributor of construction products that
was sold a manufacturing ERP system that failed to perform crucial distribution
functions such as inventor management (favorable jury verdict).
Testified for a medical products manufacturer against a major ERP
software developer regarding a version of its software that was represented as
having been fully tested and operational, but which was so defective and unreliable
that it was ultimately withdrawn from the market (favorable arbitration decision).
Testified for a state government agency relating to excessive
implementation and support costs billed by a contractor for a defective
custom-developed system (favorable arbitration decision).
Testified for a maintenance management software developer
relating to a service management system that passed all buyer-specified acceptance
tests but the buyer refused payment (settled favorably after deposition).
Testified for a food products manufacturer regarding an ERP
software implemetation that was incompetently managed and executed, and critical
information was knowledgeably withheld; resulting in a failed implementation and
excessive costs being billed (settled favorably after deposition).
Testified for an electronics manufacturer against a major ERP
software developer and its implementation firm, relating to manufacturing software
that failed to maintain accurate inventory records and failed to comply with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (settled favorably during arbitration
hearing).
Testified for a hospital administration software developer alleged to
have delivered faulty record-keeping software (settled favorably after deposition).
Testified for a truck dealership against a major ERP software
developer regarding software that was represented as being "fully integrated", but
showed obvious software defects when passing critical data between its own
modules (settled favorably after deposition).
Testified for an insurance benefits administrator relating to an
outsourced software conversion project the administration firm halted prior to
completion. The software firm claimed the project would be completed in time to
meet a government deadline, but the benefits administrator was unwilling to risk
the consequences of missing the deadline (settled favorably after deposition).
Testified for a network implementation contractor sued by a
subcontractor in bankruptcy seeking payment for an defect-ridden nationwide
network implementation (settled after deposition).
Produced an expert report for a medical claims administrator
relating to CRM software package that "crashed" several times a day (settled
favorably prior to testimony).
Produced a rebuttal report for an insurance agency software
developer alleged to have delivered defective software. The software firm
had warned the agency of the the software limitations but the agency brought suit
anyway when the software firm wanted additional fees to make modifations needed
to perform additional functions (opposing expert was withdrawn).
Produced expert reports and testified in several matters (on both sides) relating
to problems allegedly caused by (a) faulty conversion of ERP software from one
operating system to another, and (b) development of defective web-based
functionality.
Most of these projects involve allegations of negligence, misrepresentation, fraud,
inadequate testing, flawed development, deficient implementation services below
minimum industry standards, ineffective or nonexistent software quality control
(including failure to adhere to ISO 9000/9001 certified procedures and/or the
Software Engineering Institute's CMM/CMMI processes) and/or functionality,
service/support, reliability or performance below minimum industry standards.
Actions have included review of actions by software developer, implementation
partner and software licensee; review of electronic discovery; production of opinion
letters and affidavits; assistance in case strategy; preparation of interrogatories and
deposition questions; deposition testimony, trial testimony and assistance in
settlement negotiations.
Attorney references and case captions are available on
request.
