Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Court Seeks ‘Fit’ Between Lost Business Value Calculation and Facts

In an antitrust suit of dueling nightclub owners, under Daubert district court admits lost profits damages testimony; but, reserving final judgment, court finds plaintiffs’ expert’s lost enterprise calculation lacks requisite logical connection to facts o ...

Christou v. Beatport, LLC

In an antitrust suit of dueling nightclub owners, under Daubert district court admits lost profits damages testimony; but, reserving final judgment, court finds plaintiffs’ expert’s lost enterprise calculation lacks requisite logical connection to facts o ...

After Passing Daubert, Lost Profits Expert May Have Won Settlement for Client

Federal district court denies Daubert challenge to plaintiff’s lost profits expert, finding his reliance on optimistic management projections and comparable companies were better suited for cross-examination rather than exclusion.

Insignia Systems, Inc. v. News America Marketing In-Store, Inc.

Federal district court denies Daubert challenge to plaintiff’s lost profits expert, finding his reliance on optimistic management projections and comparable companies were better suited for cross-examination rather than exclusion.

Expert Financial Evidence Helps Prove ‘Stunning’ Price Discrimination Suit

Court finds “stunning” case of price discrimination based on expert evidence.

Feesers Inc. v. Michael Foods Inc.

Court finds sufficien proof for “stunning” case of price discrimination based on expert evidence.

Antitrust Claims in Copper Trading Scandal Hinge on Reliability of Damages Experts

Court permits antitrust claims to proceed to trial, based largely on plaintiffs’ econometric model and other expert proof of damages.

Southwire Co. v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Court permits antitrust claims to proceed to trial, based largely on plaintiffs’ econometric model and other expert proof of damages.

Lost Profits Must Be Based on Net Profits, Not Gross Profits

The California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, affirmed a lower court’s grant of a motion for a new trial on damages where it determined that the lost profits were computed using the wrong measure of damages because they were calculated using gross pro ...

Silver Valley Propane, Inc. v. Lamanco, Inc.

The California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, affirmed a lower court’s grant of a motion for a new trial on damages where it determined that the lost profits were computed using the wrong measure of damages because they were calculated using gross pro ...

Damages for Price Fixing Determined Using Historical Sales

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a jury’s award of lost profits in this vertical minimum price fixing antitrust action. The lost future profits award was calculated based on 3-year average of PSKS’ sales of Leegin goods, where gros ...

PSKS, Inc. v. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a jury’s award of lost profits in this vertical minimum price fixing antitrust action. The lost future profits award was calculated based on 3-year average of PSKS’ sales of Leegin goods, where gros ...

El Aguila Food Products, Inc., et al. v. Gruma Corporation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court’s exclusion of a financial expert in this antitrust action because the expert failed to consider the effects of lawful competition and did not consider the comparability of the plaintiff.

Consideration of Lawful Competitive Activity Is Required in Lost Profits Analysis

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court’s exclusion of a financial expert in this antitrust action because the expert failed to consider the effects of lawful competition and did not consider the comparability of the plaintiff.

Castle McCulloch, Inc. v. Donald Lee Freedman, et al.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision granting a direct verdict in this unfair and deceptive trade practices matter because the plaintiff failed to show that it suffered any actual harm. It did present evidence of damages ...

Assumptions in Lost Revenue Analysis Should Consider Potential Drops in Revenue Not Associated With Any Wrongful Action

The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision granting a direct verdict in this unfair and deceptive trade practices matter because the plaintiff failed to show that it suffered any actual harm. It did present evidence of damages ...

Franchiser’s Sale Objectives Used to Measure Lost Profits in Price Discrimination Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed an award of lost profits that compensated Reeder-Simco GMC for Volvo’s price discrimination practices. In calculating the lost profits, the appellate court affirmed the use of sale objectives set by Volvo to measure Reed ...

Reeder-Simco GMC, Inc. v. Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corporation

The U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed an award of lost profits that compensated Reeder-Simco GMC for Volvo’s price discrimination practices. In calculating the lost profits, the appellate court affirmed the use of sale objectives set by Volvo to measure Reed ...

R.K. Enterprises, LLC, et al. v. Pro-Comp Management, Inc., et al.

The Arkansas Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s damage award in this misappropriation of trade secrets matter. The lower court’s award was based on the tort claim of conversion remedy. The Supreme Court concluded that the Trade Secrets Act provided th ...

The Measure of Damages Is Lost Profits in Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Case

The Arkansas Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s damage award in this misappropriation of trade secrets matter. The lower court’s award was based on the tort claim of conversion remedy. The Supreme Court concluded that the Trade Secrets Act provided th ...

No Safe Harbor From Predatory Pricing Claim With Price Averaging Across Markets Argument

The California Court of Appeals, First District, determined that consideration of a predatory pricing claim under California’s Unfair Business Practices Act should be considered on a market-by-market basis.

Fisherman's Wharf Bay Cruise Corp. v. San Francisco Superior Court

The California Court of Appeals, First District, determined that consideration of a predatory pricing claim under California’s Unfair Business Practices Act should be considered on a market-by-market basis.

CPA’s Report Found Insufficient to Support Antitrust Claim

The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment that determined that the defendant did not violate any antitrust or tort laws when it competed with Motorsports and later bought the company. The appellate court agreed th ...

Motorsports Racing Plus, Inc. v. Arctic Cat Sales, Inc., et al.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment that determined that the defendant did not violate any antitrust or tort laws when it competed with Motorsports and later bought the company.

Antitrust Damages Established Using Regression Analysis

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the jury’s award of damages for United States Tobacco Company’s (USTC) anticompetitive behavior based on sales Conwood would have made in the moist snuff market but for USTC’s behavior. The damages ...

1 - 25 of 37 results