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
In re El Paso Pipeline Partners, L.P. Derivative Litig.
Financial Advisor’s ‘Real Client Was the Deal,’ Says Chancery
Chancery says “dropdown” of assets from parent to master limited partnership resulted in overpayment; transaction was enabled by financial advisor that took orders from parent regardless of whether opinion “made sense as a matter of valuation theory.”
AstraZeneca AB v. Apotex Corp.
Federal Circuit Weighs Use of EMVR in Pharmaceutical Case
Federal Circuit affirms award of 50% of gross margin, finding that, even though the entire market value rule is not per se inapplicable in the pharmaceutical context, it does not apply in this case because patents cover the entire infringing product.
Advanced Drainage Sys. v. Quality Culvert, Inc.
Court Endorses Before and After Method for Lost Profits
In Daubert case, court accepts before and after method for lost profits and diminution of value calculation but excludes parts of expert testimony because they merely restated company assumptions and conclusions without undergoing testing from the expert.
Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc.
Federal Circuit Sweeps Aside Lost Profits Theories and Award
Federal Circuit strikes down lost profits where patentee does not practice patents and fails to qualify for convoyed sales because of missing functional relationship between nonpatented parts it sells to related company and latter’s patented products.
Am. Eagle Waste Indust., LLC v. St. Louis County
Admissibility Does Not Depend on Personal Knowledge of Facts
Appeals court says expert’s lack of personal knowledge of information undergirding lost profits calculation does not disqualify his opinion, as long as he can show experts in his field would rely on this information and it is otherwise reasonably reliable ...
Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp.
Court Declares Lost Profits Analysis ‘Goes Too Far’
Court says nontraditional lost profits theory goes “too far” as it assumes sales occurred pursuant to a license the parties negotiated but never actually executed and assumes revenue derived not only from patents-in-suit, but also related unpatented softw ...
Chambers v. Fike
Court Draws Line Between Data Quality and Data Quantity
In personal injury case involving sole owner of LLC, court leans on 7th Circuit Manpower decision in deciding which parts of expert’s loss analysis to admit; it dismisses defendants’ objections concerned with data quality rather than data quantity.
Cortes v. 3A N. Park Ave. Rest Corp.
Lack of Marketability a Factor in Valuing Minority Interest
In buyout case, calculation of fair value of minority shareholder’s interest in restaurant turns on forensic accountant’s credit/cash ratio analysis; New York trial court says law recognizes lack of marketability as a factor in valuing closely held corpor ...
J&M Distrib., Inc. v. Hearth & Home Techs., Inc.
What Role for Revenue Ruling 59-60 Factors in Valuing Closely Held Business?
Expert’s use of Revenue Ruling 59-60 for valuation of closely held business and for damages calculation does not render opinion inadmissible under Daubert, court says, noting that scope of revenue ruling goes beyond valuation of estate and gift taxes.
Russell v. Allianze Life Ins. Co. of N.A.
Expert’s Failure to Adhere to Objective Standard Spoils Analysis
Court excludes lost profits analysis under Daubert where expert calculates value of plaintiff’s book of business without documenting comparables, verifying plaintiff’s claims as to number of lost clients, and employing objective work-life expectancy data.
Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Corp. (II)
Pivotal Ruling on Damage Calculation for SEP Infringement
In dispute over infringement of standard-essential patent (SEP), Federal Circuit holds royalty must be apportioned to the value of the patented feature and must exclude any added value to the patented feature from standard’s widespread adoption.
Lane v. Lampkin (I)
What Rationale for Net Book Value in Damages Analysis?
Appeals court finds trial court did not err when it incorporated net book value calculation in its lost profits analysis in a case claiming breach of fiduciary duty and usurpation of business opportunity; dissent says damages calculation is “illogical.”
VirnetX, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (II)
EMVR Must Not Swallow Apportionment, Federal Circuit Says
Federal Circuit strikes award against Apple, finding it resulted from district court’s misstating the law on the entire market value rule and apportionment and court’s failure to serve as gatekeeper under Daubert and exclude unreliable damages testimony.
Packgen v. Berry Plastics Corp. (I)
Court Emphasizes Benefit of Hindsight in Evaluating Loss Period
Court finds business valuator is qualified under Daubert to proffer lost profits calculation relying on statistics methods and says expert’s loss period is not a mere “guess” because hindsight reduces years of uncertainty as to relevant market conditions.
PharmAthene, Inc. v. SIGA Technologies, Inc.
Chancery’s Reversal on Damages Opinion Bodes Well for Plaintiff
In a major pharmaceutical case, on remand Delaware Chancery finds plaintiff proved it had a reasonable expectation of profits at the time of breach; court accepts plaintiff expert’s damages model, but orders adjustments, particularly to sales quantity.
St. Alphonsus Diversified Care, Inc. v. MRI Associates, LLP
Usurped Opportunity Case Justifies Use of Defendant’s Profits
Appeals court validates expert’s use of defendant’s net profits as measure of damages in usurped business opportunity case; hypothesizing a facility that the plaintiff could have had and the profits it might made in competition “would not make sense.”
LightLab Imaging, Inc. v. Axsun Technologies, Inc.
Use of Reliable Method Does Not Assure Admissibility
Appeals court finds trial court had discretion under Daubert to exclude expert testimony on future lost profits where expert used the “first mover advantage” as part of his DCF analysis to quantify damages and ended up with an unreliable method.
Dominion Liquid Technologies, LLC v. GT Beverage Co., LLC
Failure to Specify Offset Value Does Not Preclude Expert’s Admissibility
In contract dispute, court finds defendant expert’s testimony regarding offset value of new equipment plaintiff installed in reliance on contract is relevant under Daubert even though expert fails to state precise monetary benefit to plaintiff.
MacDermid Printing Solutions, Inc. v Cortron Corp.
A Time Limit on Use of Destruction of Business Method?
Court finds damages expert’s use of destruction of business method is not improper despite a four-year gap between the alleged offending conduct and the company’s demise, and it does not render his calculation inadmissible under Daubert.
Roll-Rite, LLC v Shur-Co, LLC
Expert’s Per-Unit Lost Profits Calculation Satisfies Daubert
Expert’s use of Panduit to show causation and reconstruct hypothetical market for lost profits analysis satisfies Daubert, court says; expert showed demand for patented product and provided method for calculating actual damages on per-unit basis.
Harrison Mfg., LLC v. JMG Mfg., Inc.
Do Lost Profits Represent Diminished Value or Double Recovery?
In negligent misrepresentation suit arising out of plaintiff’s loss of business, court allows damages calculation that “identifies” lost profits, viewing lost profits as “a subset” of the total damages, not an additional amount.
Antioch Co. Litig. Trust v. Morgan
Lost Value Opinion Using Untested Data Points Is No Go
Court excludes lost value opinion from expert who was versed in business valuation, but unfamiliar with scientific damages methodologies and did not test reliability of sources providing data points for damages calculations.
Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (IV)
Samsung’s About-Face on Off-the-Market Lost Profits Calculation
Based on prior ruling requiring that analysis of off-the-market lost profits consider potential design-arounds as of the date of first infringement rather than the notice, court rejects Samsung’s pretrial motion to preclude calculation of Apple’s expert.
Sloan Valve Company v. Zurn Industries, Inc.
Abandoning ‘Classic Way’ to Royalty Analysis, Expert Gets Lost
Court excludes royalty analysis veering from “classic way” in that expert used number of infringing products, not revenue, as royalty base and dollar amount, not percentage of the revenue, as royalty rate.
Mosaid Technologies Inc. v. LSI Corp.
‘Stand-Alone’ Lost Profits Claim Sinks, as Does Expert Opinion
In lost licensing opportunity suit, court excludes damages opinion where expert failed to vet assumptions in plaintiff’s business plan; issue is to determine market value of loss not lost profits as such.