Meteorologist Steve Wistar determined that at the time of the incident, a Nor-Easter was causing wind-blown heavy rain at the site in Manhattan.
Published May 18, 2026 2:27 PM EDT
|
Updated Sep 3, 2026 5:50 PM EDT
>>Learn more about AccuWeather For Business
Smoke continues to shroud the sun as it rises behind the skyline of Manhattan in New York City on June 7, 2023, as seen from Guttenberg, New Jersey. (Photo by Kena Betancur/VIEWpress/Getty Images)
After a 65-pound recliner fell from the roof of a 12-story Manhattan building and severely injured a pedestrian, AccuWeather’s expert forensic meteorologists were asked to determine whether high winds from a nor’easter could have caused the accident. The analysis estimated that winds may have reached 60 mph at the top of the building. However, wind tunnel testing showed that these winds were not strong enough to lift the chair over the roof’s 4-foot parapet wall. AccuWeather’s findings clarified the scientific evidence, although the precise cause of the chair clearing the wall remained undetermined. The parties later reached a confidential settlement.
— A 65-pound recliner fell from the roof of a 12-story Manhattan building and seriously injured a pedestrian.
— A nor’easter was producing wind-driven heavy rain at the time of the incident.
— Wind gusts at surrounding airports reached approximately 45 mph at the standard measuring height of 33 feet.
— AccuWeather estimated that winds could have reached approximately 60 mph at the top of the building.
— Wind tunnel testing showed that the estimated winds were not strong enough to lift the chair over the 4-foot parapet wall.
— The analysis did not support the conclusion that wind alone caused the chair to clear the wall.
— The precise cause of the chair falling from the roof remained undetermined.
— AccuWeather’s forensic weather analysis helped the parties better understand the scientific evidence before reaching a confidential settlement.
The plaintiff, a promising young MIT student, sued the owners of a 12-story Manhattan building and the tenants of its top-floor penthouse after a heavy recliner fell from the roof. The chair struck the woman as she walked along the sidewalk, causing serious brain damage.
Because a powerful storm was affecting Manhattan at the time, determining whether wind could have moved the chair became an important issue in the litigation. AccuWeather Expert Forensic Meteorologist Steve Wistar was retained to reconstruct the weather conditions and evaluate the wind speeds at roof level.
AccuWeather determined that a nor’easter was producing wind-driven heavy rain at the site in January. The highest wind gusts at surrounding airports increased during the hour before the incident, reaching approximately 45 mph at the standard observation height of 33 feet above the ground.
Airport observations alone could not establish the wind speed at the top of a 12-story building. Wind typically increases with height, making a specialized calculation necessary to better understand the conditions affecting the penthouse roof.
Using the power-law relationship for the increase of wind with height, AccuWeather estimated that wind speeds could have reached approximately 60 mph at the top of the building. This analysis provided a site-specific estimate of the wind exposure at roof level rather than relying solely on lower-elevation airport measurements.
Wind tunnel testing was also conducted using the chair involved in the incident. The testing indicated that winds of approximately 60 mph were not strong enough to lift the 65-pound recliner over the 4-foot parapet wall surrounding the penthouse roof.
The analysis established that strong winds affected the building, but the available evidence did not support the conclusion that those winds alone could have lifted the chair over the parapet. As a result, the precise cause of the chair clearing the wall and falling to the sidewalk remained undetermined.
This finding demonstrates an important role of forensic meteorology in litigation. Expert analysis can identify what weather could have caused while also ruling out explanations that are not supported by the scientific evidence.
After considering the weather analysis, wind tunnel testing, the circumstances of the incident, and the injured woman’s substantial earning potential, the parties reached a confidential settlement. AccuWeather’s analysis helped bring clarity to the scientific aspects of the dispute and allowed both sides to better evaluate the evidence.
AccuWeather’s forensic meteorologists reconstruct weather conditions at precise locations and times using publicly available information, proprietary datasets, airport observations, radar, wind data, precipitation records, and specialized meteorological calculations.
This objective approach helps attorneys and insurers prepare stronger cases, challenge unsupported claims, make better-informed decisions, and best protect their clients. AccuWeather experts provide clear reports and testimony that explain both the potential effects and the scientific limitations of weather evidence.