2nd Circuit Affirms Nixing of Award Due to Bad Yardstick Analysis

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
November 2, 2017

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in this product:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (1,498 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
5136 Men's and Boys' Clothing and Furnishings
423910 Sporting and Recreational Goods and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
economic damages & lost profits
lost profits, breach of contract, expert testimony, reasonable certainty, comparable, lost business value, license agreement
Washington v. Kellwood Co. (IV)
714 Fed. Appx 35
US
Federal Court
2nd Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Scott Barnes (plaintiffs); Gary Trugman (defendant)
En banc

Summary

Appeals court validates nixing of future lost profits award where expert calculated damages for a startup company based on revenues of market leader; court finds expert failed to use reasonable comparator, making his yardstick analysis legally unsound.

See Also

Washington v. Kellwood Co. (IV)

Full Text of Court Cases
November 2, 2017

Appeals court validates nixing of future lost profits award where expert calculated damages for a startup company based on revenues of market leader; court finds expert failed to use reasonable comparator, making his yardstick analysis legally unsound.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation UpdateVol. 24 No. 1
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition