The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition
Welcome to The Comprehensive Guide To Economic Damages, 7th Edition. This publication is about financial evidence: how to gather it, interpret it, and tell its story in a lawsuit or litigation setting.
The guide includes representational analysis as well as digests and full text of case law on financial damages. Here you are able to search related case law via case type, court, state/jurisdiction and more. Begin your research now.
Already purchased the guide? Login to access its case law content.
Search Featured Cases
Lightbox Ventures, LLC v. 3 RD Home Ltd.
Blind Reliance on Client Data and Wide-Ranging Values Gut New Venture Valuation
Court excludes lost profits calculation and valuations of new venture; experts’ unquestioning adoption of plaintiff’s data and assumptions, the large range of valuations proffered, and disclaimers accompanying valuations undermine opinions’ meaningfulness.
Waggoner v. Barclays PLC
Direct Evidence of Price Impact Not Always Necessary, 2nd Circuit Says
In a securities fraud action, appeals court upholds class certification; trial court did not err when it found direct evidence of price impact by way of event study was not necessary to show market efficiency where there was strong indirect evidence.
Washington v. Kellwood Co. (IV)
2nd Circuit Affirms Nixing of Award Due to Bad Yardstick Analysis
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.
Mifflinburg Telegraph, Inc. v. Criswell, Inc.
Court Favors Lost Profits Over Lost Value Damages for Surviving Business
In business tort case, court says damages to compensate plaintiff for loss of goodwill should take the form of lost profits, not total loss of value damages, where defendant employees were not subject to noncompetes and plaintiff was not completely destro ...
Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc. (II)
Infringer’s Call for Apportionment of Lost Profits Goes Unheeded
Federal Circuit denies defendants’ request for rehearing en banc on issue of whether lost profits award was improper because calculation involving a multicomponent product required apportionment analysis in addition to satisfaction of Panduit factors.
West Plains, LLC v. Retzlaff Grain Co. (II)
Loss of Value Damages Does Not Require Showing of Complete Destruction
In tortious interference with business relations case, 8th Circuit says district court did not err when it allowed plaintiff’s expert to testify to total loss of value where company was not completely destroyed but harmed; damages award was not excessive.
Lane v. Lampkin (III)
Mississippi High Court Clarifies Best Practice for Lost Profits Calculation
In usurped-corporate-opportunity case, high court upholds trial court’s lost profits calculation based on actual numbers of company benefitting from wrongdoing, although best way is to project future profits or consider past profits of damaged business.
Horizon Health Corp. v. Acadia Healthcare Co.
Defective Lost Profits Analysis Triggers Take-Nothing Ruling
High court discusses level of evidence required to establish future lost profits with “reasonable certainty”; plaintiff did not show it lost any contracts owing to defendants’ wrongdoing and failed to show profitability specific to claimed lost contracts.
Willis v. Big Lots, Inc.
Expert’s Damages Opinion Specific Enough for Class Certification Stage
In a securities case, court applies Daubert analysis to plaintiff expert’s market efficiency opinion and event study; expert is qualified even without academic background, and his damages opinion is sufficiently specific to facts of the case and reliable.
Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc. (I)
Infringer’s Call for Apportionment of Lost Profits Goes Unheeded
Federal Circuit rejects challenge to lost profits award; patentee showed entitlement to lost profits from whole product by satisfying Panduit; although infringing product had multiple components, further apportionment in this case was not necessary.
Packgen v. Berry Plastics Corp. (II)
No ‘Circular Reasoning’ in Expert’s Lost Profits Calculation
Appeals court upholds lost profits award, finding expert’s damages model was admissible under Daubert; market survey was only one of “competing principles or methods” to gather facts on sales, and failure to use it does not make opinion per se unreliable.
TiVo Research & Analytics, Inc. v. TNS Media Research
Expert’s Exclusion Dooms ‘Frozen Market’ Theory and Loss of Value Claims
Court excludes expert damages calculation where expert relied solely on “temporal relationship” to show causation between loss of value in plaintiff’s business and defendants’ actions and did not account for alternative explanation for plaintiff’s loss.
Berman v. Unimin Corp.
Damages Calculation Admissible Under Facts Available to PI Expert
Court says P.I. expert properly based economic loss determination on plaintiff’s actual work situation at time of expert report instead of speculating about future earnings; testimony is helpful to jury because it explains issues not usually encountered.
Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple, Inc. (VI)
Supreme Court Obfuscates Design Patent Damages Issue
Supreme Court agrees with Samsung that design patent infringement damages statute (Section 289) does not per se require infringer to pay profits from entire product but can be limited to profits from component(s) to which the protected design was applied.
Comcast Cable Communs. v. Sprint Communs. Co.
Court Affirms Validity of Patent Citation Analysis in Royalty Calculation
Court says forward citation method to determine value of patent in suit is not per se unreliable and royalty testimony based on it is admissible under Daubert; also, there is no bright-line rule against use of code- or step-counting for apportionment.
Sherwood Invs. Overseas Ltd. v. Royal Bank of Scot. N.V. (In re Sherwood Invs. Overseas Ltd., Inc.)
Case Collapses When Experts Apply Wrong Measure of Damages
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.
Washington v. Kellwood Co. (III)
Court Sets Aside Big Lost Profits Award Based on Bad Yardstick Analysis
Court reconsiders earlier order for retrial on lost value damages, finding plaintiffs “had no intention of pursuing a realistic damages award” and lack admissible evidence supporting multimillion-dollar value claims; instead, court awards one dollar.
Select Comfort Corp. v. Tempur Sealy Int’l, Inc.
Court Disapproves of Use of Damages Model to Establish Liability
In false advertising suit, court finds plaintiff expert’s narrowly tailored disgorgement calculation is admissible under Daubert; but court rejects “high-end” damages model based on profits from sale of products not targeted by defendant’s advertising.
Arctic Cat v. Sabertooth Motor Group
Court Nixes Royalty Calculation Relying on Unalike Prior Licenses
Court says prior licensing agreements undergirding expert’s hypothetical reasonable royalty have no bearing on what the parties would have negotiated for the ...
Marten Transp., Ltd. v. Plattform Adver., Inc.
Court Distinguishes Between Proving Fact of Damage and Amount
Court upholds lost profits award, noting at trial plaintiff established “the fact of damages” with the requisite certainty; defendant deprived plaintiff of learning about job applicants, some of whom plaintiff would have hired to perform additional work.
3M Innovative Props. Co. v. GDC, Inc.
No Automatic Bar to Royalties Accruing After Life of Patent
Court finds expert’s use of two-supplier and market share methods as well as Panduit test generate admissible lost profits calculation; court also admits expert’s reasonable royalty analysis, saying it does not include unlawful post-expiration sales.
Mattress Closeout Ctr. IV, LLC v. Panera, LLC
Court Deems Future Lost Profits Formula an Exercise in Speculation
Court rejects lost profits projections based on expert’s unique formula finding calculation was based on “questionable” assumptions; court also finds no “hard” evidence that damage from defendant’s conduct had long-term effect on plaintiff’s customers.
Washington v. Kellwood Co. (II)
Court Sets Aside Big Lost Profits Award Based on Bad Yardstick Analysis
Court strikes down multimillion-dollar lost profits award, finding it was based on expert testimony that was “sheer surmise and conjecture”; using yardstick method, expert claimed upstart company would have achieved 50% of sales of market leader.
Green v. Polyester Fibers, LLC
Wrong Methodology Gets Lost Compensation Forecast Excluded
Mississippi law requires discounting to present value, court says; court affirms its earlier exclusion of expert’s future lost compensation forecast because calculation was based on “total offset” method, which is disfavored in Mississippi.
Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Liown Elecs. Co.
Court Clarifies Rule 26 Protection for ‘Reporting’ and ‘Non-Reporting’ Experts
Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.