Case Collapses When Experts Apply Wrong Measure of Damages

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 23 No. 1
BVLaw Case Update
January 2017

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
Already a subscriber?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (413 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
6211 Security Brokers, Dealers, and Flotation Companies
523110 Investment Banking and Securities Dealing
economic damages & lost profits
lost profits, breach of contract, daubert, expert testimony, admissibility, reliability, market value
Sherwood Invs. Overseas Ltd. v. Royal Bank of Scot. N.V. (In re Sherwood Invs. Overseas Ltd., Inc.)
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136096
September 30, 2016
US
Federal Court
Florida
United States District Court
Robert E. Conner, Richard J. Sussman (Thornapple Associates) and Bruce S. Foerster (plaintiff)
Byron

Summary

District court adopts Bankruptcy Court’s finding that expert testimony was inadmissible because the plaintiff’s experts used the wrong method to calculate damages; lost profits were not available where the plaintiff’s business was completely destroyed.

See Also

Case Collapses When Experts Apply Wrong Measure of Damages

Court Case Digests
September 30, 2016

District court adopts Bankruptcy Court’s finding that expert testimony was inadmissible because the plaintiff’s experts used the wrong method to calculate damages; lost profits were not available where the plaintiff’s business was completely destroyed.