Evidence Solutions is a leading expert witness firm.
Virtual or in-person, we are dedicated to providing unparalleled expertise and professional guidance in legal matters.
We are knowledgeable, experienced and ready to serve you.

Meet our Team
Our Experts

James Bass
Digital Forensics

Robert Bennett
Accident Reconstruction

Daniel Brown
Law Enforcement

Craig Cherney
Real Estate

Scott Greene
Digital Evidence

Nancy Grugle, Ph.D., CHFP
Human Factors

George Jenson
Greek Fraternity

James E. Lewis
Transportation Safety

Robert Marcello, Ph.D., LCP, CCHP
Clinical Psychology

Jeff Martin
Digital Forensics

Benjamin A. Morrow, PE
Construction

Brian Riker
Transportation Safety

John Ross
Commercial Trucking

Jeff Scurran
Sports & Fitness Safety

Todd M. Seger
Aviation

Thomas Shea, D.SC., CPP
Law Enforcement

Sherry Young
Occupational Therapy
Latest Articles
Navigating Landlord-Tenant Disputes in 2025: Eviction Protections, Lease Enforcement, and Landlord Duties to Mitigate Damages
Navigating Landlord-Tenant Disputes in 2025: Eviction Protections, Lease Enforcement, and Landlord Duties to Mitigate Damages
Understanding Lease Flexibility in Changing Circumstances
Every year, businesses’ and individuals’ personal journeys face inevitable change. Often that can include a situation where a tenant is locked into a multi-year commercial or residential lease agreement which the tenant no longer has any need to rely on such real property. Tenants and landlords alike should be fully aware that simply because a lease contract states a 5-, 7-, or 10-year duration term, does not necessarily mean that tenant must 100% stay at that location until the final date of the existing lease.
Landlord's Duty to Mitigate Damages After a Tenant Departure
Landlords who find themselves with tenants unilaterally abandoning a leased premise has an immediate duty to mitigate damages. Put another way, a landlord cannot sit idly by when it receives back an unoccupied space with a lease that still has many months or years remaining on the original contract. Upon learning of the departed tenant, the landlord must immediately make a good faith effort to bring the leased space back to the open market in a reasonably repaired and occupiable condition. This duty includes immediately contracting for any needed internal repairs or system improvements. It also requires the landlord to bring the space back on the open market for active lease, seeking offers from new Bonafide good faith third-party lease applicants who have shown or are now showing interest in leasing the space for their own use. Assuming the landlord successfully places a new tenant at the deserted location for the same or higher rents as previously contracted, the landlord’s damages owed from the breaching and previously departed tenant will be capped to the number of actual vacant months incurred by the landlord while repairing and securing a new paying tenant for the same location. For example, on a 10-year lease, if a tenant breaches the lease and unilaterally moves out of the space after 36 months, the landlord technically is owned for seven more years of lost rents. However, if the landlord places a replacement tenant into the space within 90 days, the landlord’s damages would be limited to the three lost months of rent—not the 7 years.
Risks of Bad Faith and Landlord Inaction
Some landlords have been known to let the “damages run up” by ignoring the vacant space, by not immediately investing in new tenant improvements to make the space in a rent-ready condition, or by ignoring new tenant leads or by asking a very high price per square foot for new tenants—all the while knowing than the market rate rents in the area are actually much lower.
Landlords beware here. If a savvy departing tenant commences litigation and pursues discovery which reveals a landlord sandbagging tenant improvements or active marketing of the vacant space at true market rents—the courts can find the landlord acted in bad faith, and the court can elect to cap the landlord’s damages despite that the early departing tenant technically breached the lease by vacating the space earlier than what the lease contract required. Emails to and from prospective tenants who want to come in behind departing tenant which are either ignored by the landlord, or delayed by the landlord, can prove to be key evidence in any civil action between the landlord and the early departure tenant.
As a landlord, prompt and reasonable responses to new tenant inquiries are critical to demonstrate to a court that the landlord acted in good faith and sought to place a brand-new replacement tenant into the space as quickly as was commercially reasonable to do at that time in that particular submarket.
The Role of Real Estate Expert Witnesses in Lease Disputes
In landlord-tenant civil litigation, retaining a seasoned real estate expert witness can be critical to educate courts on the standards of care otherwise expected both of tenants and landlords alike, in the unlikely but inevitable event of a leasehold ending early based on a tenant’s super charged growth, or lack of funds, or both, which causes a sudden new inventory of leasehold space for a landlord to immediately bring back to the market. The expert witness can educate the judge or the jury of what “should have happened” as compared to what really happened in any failed landlord-tenant fact dispute over a broken lease.
“The Truck Driver Shouldn’t Have Been There” - Texas Supreme Court Overturns Historic $90 Million Verdict - An Expert's Perspective
“The Truck Driver Shouldn’t Have Been There” - Texas Supreme Court Overturns Historic $90 Million Verdict - An Expert's Perspective
BY JAMES LEWIS, M.Ed., CDS
Transportation Safety Expert Witness
In a recent landmark ruling in the case of Blake v. Werner Enterprises, the Texas Supreme Court overturned lower court’s rulings awarding the plaintiffs in this case roughly $90 million in damages – the largest verdict ever against a trucking company, and an addition to the long line of so called “nuclear verdicts” in the transportation industry.
This verdict was completely reversed in favor of trucking company Werner Enterprises, where justices of the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiff’s assertion that the Werner truck shouldn’t have been in the place and time to participate in the crash was not related to the cause of the crash. The crash happened when the plaintiff’s pickup truck careened out of control in icy conditions and struck the Werner truck. Additional findings were such that if it wasn’t the Werner truck that was hit, it could have been another large truck, a passenger vehicle, a light pole, or a bridge column – and none of those vehicles or objects caused the crash.
Plaintiff's Arguments
Original arguments by plaintiff’s counsel revolved around the notion that Mr. Ali, the driver for Werner Enterprises, knowing that the weather in the Midland/Odessa area was inclement, should have or could have stopped at a number of safe parking places like truck stops or rest areas, versus continuing with his journey.
Understanding Driver Qualification and FMCSA Compliance
A similar argument that is a factor in many other transportation accident cases involves the FMCSA-mandated Driver Qualification File. Drivers who do not have a complete and compliant driver qualification file and are involved in an accident should not have been present at the time and place to participate in the crash, as they should not have been operating a commercial motor vehicle, period. Having a commercial driver’s license alone does not qualify you to participate in interstate commerce, and in most states, intrastate commerce. Defense counsel for Werner Enterprises indicated that Mr. Ali was fully qualified and compliant with FMCSA regulations at the time of the crash in question, removing this argument from relevance in the case.
FMCSA 49 CFR 391.11(a): The “Shall Not Drive” Doctrine
In fact, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) 49 CFR 391.11(a), also known in the industry as the “shall not drive” doctrine, states clearly:
§ 391.11 General qualifications of drivers. (a) A person shall not drive a commercial motor vehicle unless he/she is qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle.
“Qualified” means properly vetted and documented through a compliant driver qualification file, proof of required training, and meeting all other criteria explained in FMCSA 49 CFR 391.11. If a driver is not “qualified” by this set of requirements, at that time, they should not have been operating a commercial vehicle and should not have been present to participate in a crash.
What Constitutes a Compliant Driver Qualification File?
FMCSA 49 CFR 391.53 and associated regulations subordinate regulations 40.25(j), 382.301, 382.301(a), 383.110, 383.111, 391.21, 391.23, 391.27, 391.31(e), 391.43(g), 391.51(b)(9), 384.225 outline the requirements of a proper driver qualification file. These areas include:
- A current Department of Transportation (DOT) physical/medical card.
- The verification by the company that the medical examiner was current on the National Registry.
- A Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLIS) report verifying the driver’s active license.
- A proper, complete, and accurate driver application that meets the criteria of 391.21.
- Pre-employment drug testing with a negative result prior to employment.
- Proof of random drug/alcohol testing (internal company program or group consortium).
- Safety performance verifications from previous employers (written/electronic for the past three years prior to the application).
- Drug and alcohol performance verifications from previous employers (written/electronic or the past three years prior to the application).
- An original motor vehicle record from the driver’s home state (third-party reports are not compliant).
- Driver road test or equivalent.
- Renewable documents required, such as renewed DOT physicals and annual motor vehicle record checks.
Full Compliance is Key to Lawful Operation
With all of this file complete, accurate, and current, with training conducted (per 383.110 and 383.111), only then is a driver “qualified” to operate a commercial vehicle on public roadways and compliant with 391.11(a), again known as the “shall not drive” doctrine. That regulation is simple – if you’re not properly qualified, you “shall not drive.”
Misconceptions About CDL Qualification: Insights from the DOT
Another relevant piece of insight is from DOT’s On Guard Publication concerning the assumption that simply by having a commercial driver’s license, a driver is qualified and experienced. The On Guard Publication dispels that notion:
Recent contacts with truck and bus operators indicate that some, particularly smaller operators, are mistakenly assuming that if a driver possesses a Commercial Driver's License (CDL), he or she is a trained and experienced commercial vehicle driver. This is not true and can be a very dangerous mistake. All prospective employers of commercial drivers should be aware of the following facts:
- A CDL does not indicate that the holder is a trained or experienced truck or bus driver.
- A CDL merely indicates that the holder has passed minimal skills and knowledge tests concerning the type of vehicle he or she proposes to drive.
- A CDL endorsement does not indicate that the holder is trained or experienced in the area covered by the endorsement.
- A CDL endorsement merely indicates that the holder has passed a minimal knowledge test concerning the area covered by the endorsement.
- It is incumbent upon a prospective employer of a commercial vehicle driver to ensure that driver is properly trained to operate that employer's trucks or buses and to handle that employer's freight or passengers.”
Title 49 CFR 391.11 (b)(3) (Qualification of Drivers) requires that a driver must be able, by reason of experience, training, or both, to safely operate the commercial motor vehicle he or she drives. This requirement is not met by simply ascertaining that a prospective driver holds a CDL.
Final Position: Qualification is the Foundation for Responsibility
Without a proper, complete, and accurate driver qualification file, the truck, trailer, and driver should not have been present to participate in a crash because the driver was not qualified to be there. In the end, qualification is not just a regulatory requirement, it is the threshold that determines whether a driver should be on the road at all. Without it, a driver’s presence becomes a legitimate issue.
About the Author
James Lewis is a seasoned Transportation Safety Expert with over 20 years of experience serving as an expert witness in trucking and transportation litigation and over 40 years in the industry. A Class A CDL holder since 1987 with more than two million no-fault accident-free miles, James brings real-world insight to complex cases involving FMCSA and DOT compliance, towing and recovery operations, and transportation safety protocols. He has held roles as a terminal manager, safety director, driver trainer, and owner/operator, and also founded a full-service freight brokerage.
In addition to his transportation expertise, James consults in the automotive sector on cases involving dealership fraud, lemon law, vehicle valuation, and more. He has been qualified as an expert in both federal and state courts, authored hundreds of expert reports, and provided testimony in over 900 cases.
The Case for Proactive Cybersecurity: A Forensic Expert's Perspective
The Case for Proactive Cybersecurity: A Forensic Expert's Perspective
BY JEFF MARTIN, CFCE
Digital Forensics Expert & Cybersecurity Consultant
In today’s increasingly digital and interconnected world, cybersecurity is no longer a niche concern reserved for large tech companies or financial institutions—it’s a fundamental business obligation. As a digital forensic expert, I have been involved in hundreds of post-incident investigations, and in nearly every case involving Business Email Compromise (BEC) or wire fraud, the outcome could have been prevented by applying basic cybersecurity practices.
These incidents often result in losses reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yet they are rarely the result of highly advanced, state-sponsored attacks. More often, they stem from simple, preventable failures—such as a lack of multi-factor authentication, poor email filtering, unsecured access protocols, or a lack of employee awareness training. These are not new threats, and they are not difficult to mitigate. But in the absence of a proactive cybersecurity posture, they remain dangerously common.
Fragmented Regulatory Landscape
While regulations at the state and federal levels continue to evolve, the current regulatory landscape is fragmented. For example, New York’s Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) cybersecurity regulation places rigorous standards on financial entities, while California’s consumer-focused privacy and audit rules cast a broader net. Organizations operating across multiple jurisdictions must navigate a complex and sometimes conflicting set of rules—each with its own definitions, enforcement timelines, and reporting requirements. This fragmented environment increases compliance burdens and legal risk, especially for companies that lack a centralized governance or information security framework.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has added to the urgency by introducing a four-day reporting rule for material cybersecurity incidents. While this rule encourages timely disclosure, it can also put pressure on companies to report incidents before they have fully assessed the scope or identified the threat actor. As a forensic professional, I know that conducting a complete and accurate investigation takes time. A modest extension of the reporting window would allow organizations to provide more accurate, meaningful disclosures—benefiting both transparency and public trust.
If federal enforcement becomes less consistent or less stringent, it is very likely that individual states will continue to fill the perceived regulatory gaps by introducing their own cybersecurity mandates. We’ve already seen this with consumer privacy laws, and cybersecurity standards are likely to follow a similar trend. This only reinforces the need for organizations to build adaptable, scalable compliance and security programs that can evolve alongside the legal landscape.
Proactive and Structured Compliance
While tracking and complying with new regulations may seem daunting, organizations can reduce the burden by being proactive and structured in their approach. Assigning a compliance officer or working with a trusted cybersecurity advisor is a foundational step. Using legal and regulatory tracking tools, performing regular policy reviews, implementing employee training programs, and maintaining clear documentation of internal controls and incident response procedures can make all the difference.
Beyond compliance, these efforts significantly reduce the risk of cyberattacks, data breaches, and financial fraud. A company that builds a security-first culture will not only protect its own assets but also honor its responsibility to the clients, partners, and communities it serves.
It’s important to note that in my years of forensic casework, I have yet to be hired by an organization that was truly well-prepared before an incident. That tells me something important: the companies that are investing in proactive cybersecurity measures are far less likely to experience the kinds of incidents that require my services in the first place. Well-prepared organizations are preventing breaches—not recovering from them.
Ultimately, cybersecurity regulations serve an important purpose. They raise the minimum standard, encourage accountability, and protect consumers. But responsible businesses should aim higher than the regulatory baseline. Proactive cybersecurity is not about doing the bare minimum to avoid penalties, it’s about taking initiative to safeguard your infrastructure, your data, and your reputation.
The companies that thrive in the digital age will be those that treat cybersecurity as a business imperative, not a compliance checkbox. Whether you're a law firm handling sensitive communications, a healthcare provider managing confidential records, or a small business processing customer transactions, the time to build resilience is now.
About the Author: Jeff Martin, CFCE, is a Certified Forensic Computer Examiner with extensive experience in digital forensics, incident response, and mobile device investigations. He consults with law firms, corporations, and law enforcement agencies nationwide on cybersecurity best practices, digital evidence handling, and expert witness services.
Top 10 Insights: Why Partnering with Digital Forensics Experts Transforms Investigations
Top 10 Insights: Why Partnering with Digital Forensics Experts Transforms Investigations
The Expanding Landscape of Digital Evidence
In today’s world, digital evidence is everywhere. Smartphones, wearables, connected vehicles, and cloud accounts all leave behind valuable data. This abundance of information presents new opportunities for investigators but also introduces significant challenges.
The Pressures Facing Modern Investigators
According to Cellebrite’s 2025 Industry Trends Survey, the sheer volume and complexity of digital evidence is overwhelming many investigative teams. Case backlogs are growing. Encrypted platforms and locked devices slow investigations. Many agencies lack the resources and training to keep up. The need for expert support has never been greater.
Top 10 Insights from the 2025 Cellebrite Survey
- Digital evidence from phones and wearables is now essential. These devices are central to many cases.
- Artificial Intelligence is reshaping investigations. Almost all agencies view AI positively, and over half plan to integrate it within two years. AI speeds up analysis and reduces errors, though regulatory issues remain.
- Cloud technology offers advantages and obstacles. While it brings scalability and security, concerns about cost and compliance remain.
- Case backlogs are increasing. Investigations now often involve multiple devices, including drones, wearables, and crypto tools.
- Accessing full device data is more difficult. Seventy-five percent of extractions use Full File System methods, and encrypted apps add complexity.
- Investigators are stretched thin. Most spend 60 to 70 hours per case on data review, and less than half have advanced training.
- Outdated evidence-sharing methods persist. Sixty percent still use USB drives and CDs, risking security and chain of custody.
- Prosecutors need better evidence sharing. Reliance on digital evidence is growing, but inefficient sharing methods cause frustration.
- The future points to AI-powered, cloud-enabled solutions. These systems can automate workflows, reduce backlogs, and build resilience.
- Expert digital forensics support is vital. Specialists turn complex data into clear, actionable intelligence.
The Critical Role of Digital Forensics Experts
Effective investigations depend on the ability to extract, analyze, and interpret data from a wide range of sources. Digital forensics experts recover evidence from smartphones, computers, wearables, drones, and encrypted apps. They use advanced techniques to access active data, deleted files, metadata, and hidden system information.
Reducing Workloads and Advancing Justice
Investigators are under pressure, often spending nearly 70 hours per case reviewing data from multiple devices. This slows down justice and increases the risk of missing vital connections.
By partnering with a digital forensics company, agencies gain immediate access to specialized expertise, advanced tools, and automated workflows. This reduces backlogs, minimizes repetitive tasks, and allows investigators to focus on analysis and strategy.
Gain a Strategic Advantage
In an era where digital evidence is as critical as DNA, agencies that invest in professional digital forensics gain a decisive edge. Digital forensics experts turn complex data into actionable intelligence, helping resolve cases faster, protect public safety, and uphold the highest standards of justice.
Contact Evidence Solutions Today
Do not let the challenges of digital evidence slow your investigations. Contact a Digital Evidence expert at Evidence Solutions to unlock the full potential of your digital evidence. Reach out today to learn how our team can support your case.
Testimonials
What Our Clients Say

Scott and his Evidence Solutions team were a pleasure to work with. Attentive every step of the way. I don’t know what I would have done without them. I will definitely call them again in the future.

Thank you for sharing your expertise as a faculty member at the Litigating Truck Cases Seminar. Because of speakers like you, we are able to offer ATLA members excellent educational programs that deal with the issues of the day.

Thanks for all your efforts in this case. I think the jury was impressed with your discovery and I have to give you the credit. It's been a pleasure working with you.

Your investigation of this matter has proven itself to be invaluable. I do not believe we would have been able to discern the identity of the culprit who hacked into Mr. Benchley's e-mail account but for your efforts.

I am greatly appreciative of ESI’s professionalism and work product. I am satisfied that we acquitted ourselves in providing our client the zealous and competent representation that he deserved, and in no small part, Evidence Solutions, Inc. and Scot...

I am writing to acknowledge and thank you for the tremendous contribution you made to the successful outcome in this case. This is a truly remarkable result which I greatly attribute to your testimony at trial. In all my years of working with experts...

Thank you again for speaking to our class. You have a natural way of explaining complex technical issues to people like me who don’t understand technology well, which is probably why you are so good at your job. And it’s funny because the talk always...

I want you to know that, over the years, I have truly enjoyed our professional relationship. Any plaintiff’s attorney handling a catastrophic tractor-trailer rig collision should seek your valued input and advice before deciding on how to proceed for...

Good news! The case settled. It was a pleasure to work with you and we thank you for your hard work and dedication.

Thank you again for speaking to our class. You have a natural way of explaining complex technical issues to people like me who don’t understand technology well, which is probably why you are so good at your job. And it’s funny because the talk always...

Scott--you did fantastic work. Thank You.

Jeff Martin, you just gave a perfect deposition. Ten stars. Thank you for lending your expertise and for being such a professional!

Your effective testimony and your willingness to work with us to assist in our understanding of the dynamics of this accident was crucial in our successful prosecution of the claim. I hope there will be an opportunity for us to work together again in...

We hired Evidence Solutions on a very contentious DRAM shop / premises case. We had always suspected that Defendants' manipulated certain drink records. It was not until we were able to demonstrate that without full disclosure of the underlying data,...

It is my privilege to report that following a trip to the Court of Appeals and facing our sixth prospective trial date, a face to face meeting of the parties finally led to a resolution of the case. Thank you for all your help and support over these ...

We retained Jeff Martin for a complex computer fraud case, and he provided invaluable assistance. Jeff educated us on the technical issues, explained unfamiliar concepts in a clear and understandable way, and guided us on the investigative steps to t...

We had two meditations and the case settled last week. Thank you for your keen insight into the various trucking issues which were involved in this matter.

Your investigation of this matter has proven itself to be invaluable. I do not believe we would have been able to discern the identity of the culprit who hacked into Mr. Benchley's e-mail account but for your efforts.

ESI brings to the table an outstanding and comprehensive understanding of big rig truck operations, yard protocols, loading procedures, including nearly everything having to do with the operation, logistics, and related matters concerning big rig tru...

I really appreciate your help in this case. I appreciate your ability to discuss technical topics in plain English.
Connect
Or
Start a Case
Email or Call Today For a Free Consultation