Plaintiff’s Overbroad Damages Calculation Prompts Court Not to Grant Award for Proven Wrongdoing

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
February 27, 2020

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. (2,440 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
7389 Business Services, NEC
522320 Financial Transactions Processing, Reserve, and Clearinghouse Activities
economic damages & lost profits
breach of contract, expert testimony, fair value, merger, investment, business tort, reasonable certainty, diminution in value
Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. SIG Growth Equity Fund I, LLP
2020 Del. Ch. LEXIS 76; 2020 WL 948513
US
State Court
Delaware
Court of Chancery
Kevin F. Dages (plaintiff); unknown (defendants)
Glasscock

Summary

Court rejects plaintiff’s damages calculation related to sweeping fraud and contract breach allegations where plaintiff submitted expert report before court’s liability rulings and failed to offer revised expert report after liability trial; damages were not sufficiently tied to proven wrongs.

See Also

Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. SIG Growth Equity Fund I, LLP

Full Text of Court Cases
February 27, 2020

Court rejects plaintiff’s damages calculation related to sweeping fraud and contract breach allegations where plaintiff submitted expert report before court’s liability rulings and failed to offer revised expert report after liability trial; damages were not sufficiently tied to proven wrongs.

This article also appears in:
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition