BVR Legal Yearbook 2019 Excerpt
Book Excerpts
The Business Valuation Case Law Yearbook, 2019 Edition is essential for business appraisers and attorneys who want to stay ahead of their peers on the most important legal issues brought up in business valuation-related cases. With in-depth analysis from BVR’s legal team, the lessons learned in this book help appraisers reach better and more defensible valuation conclusions. And, attorneys who retain appraisers as financial experts learn how their experts can help them win (or lose) in court.
2016 Legal Yearbook Excerpt
Book Excerpts
The BVR Legal and Court Case Yearbook 2016 is essential for business appraisers and attorneys who want to stay ahead of their peers on the most important legal issues confronting business valuation. With in-depth analysis from BVR’s legal team, the lessons learned in this book help appraisers come to better and more defensible valuation conclusions.
BVLaw Case Update: A One-Hour Briefing
BVR’s Case Law Update returns. Find out which recent opinions from state and federal courts have valuators talking, frowning, or puzzled by tuning in to a one-hour briefing with BVR’s executive legal editor, Sylvia Golden, and valuation expert, James Alerding (Alerding Consulting). The presenters will discuss six decisions from various legal disciplines that affect how practitioners approach litigation.
Daubert Challenges on Experts on Damages Partially Successful
The defendants challenged the testimony of the plaintiff’s damages expert, and the plaintiff challenged the testimony of the defendants’ damages rebuttal expert. The case involved a Lego interpretation model of the Second Beit Hamikdash, or Second Holy Temple, and an alleged infringement of the copyright on this model. The court struck the plaintiff’s expert’s damages of a product related to the Temple Product but allowed testimony of damages on the Temple Product. The court also struck the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony that the plaintiff should be awarded lost profits on the Temple Product plus a disgorgement of the defendants’ profits. Both may not be awarded. The court also struck portions of the defendants’ rebuttal testimony and report.
Taylor Precision Prods. v. Larimer Grp., Inc.
In the damages portion of this complex suit, the court determined damages based on the plaintiff’s expert’s determination and report of same. It awarded damages on the first component of his damages calculation, the damages based on an adjusted “lost” EBITDA, but not on the second component, which the court deemed to be speculative.
Daubert Allows for Generous View on Yardstick Analysis
Court rejects bright-line reliability test for yardstick analysis, saying expert’s failure to find a “nearly identical” comparator did not render analysis unreliable and inadmissible under Daubert and finding companies were similar in material respects.
Economic-Damages-2018-Excerpt
Book Excerpts
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Fifth Edition edited by NancyJ. Fannon and Jonathan Dunitz, bridges the gap between the economics in damages cases and what the courts say about the calculations and evidentiary requirements.
JBrick, LLC v. Chazak Kinder, Inc.
The defendants challenged the testimony of the plaintiff’s damages expert, and the plaintiff challenged the testimony of the defendants’ damages rebuttal expert. The case involved a Lego interpretation model of the Second Beit Hamikdash, or Second Holy Temple, and an alleged infringement of the copyright on this model. The court struck the plaintiff’s expert’s damages of a product related to the Temple Product but allowed testimony of damages on the Temple Product. The court also struck the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony that the plaintiff should be awarded lost profits on the Temple Product plus a disgorgement of the defendants’ profits. Both may not be awarded. The court also struck portions of the defendants’ rebuttal testimony and report.
MY Imagination v. M.Z. Berger & Co. (I)
Court says plaintiff fails New York test for lost profits; plaintiff lacks coherent damages theory and, by its own admission, is unable to do more than speculate about future profitability; expert calculation represents “the sort of conjecture the reasonable certainty standard prohibits.”
TiVo Research & Analytics, Inc. v. TNS Media Research
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.
Redcell Corp. v. A.J. Trucco, Inc.
In this trade secrets and breach of contract case, portions of each expert’s testimony were found to be offering a factual narrative that is within the purview of a lay jury to ascertain. Those portions of testimony were excluded for both experts, but the parties’ arguments as to the qualifications of the experts and supposed reliance of an expert on the work of another were denied.
IceMOS Tech. Corp. v. Omron Corp.
In contract dispute, court says claims for lost profits and lost business value fail because, for both, plaintiff is unable to determine damages with reasonable certainty; relying solely on projections of future performance, without any proof of profit, is not enough under New York law.
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, 6th Edition Excerpt
Book Excerpts
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages VOLUME ONE Edited by Nancy J. Fannon and Jonathan M. Dunit With Jimmy S. Pappas, William Scally, and Steven M. Veenema 111 SW Columbia Street, Suite 750, Portland, OR 97201 (503) 479-8200 • www.bvresources.com SIXTH EDITION Copyright © 2020 by Business Valuation Resources, LLC (BVR). All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying ...
EconomicDamages_7Ed_Excerpt
Book Excerpts
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages VOLUME ONE Edited by With Jimmy S. Pappas, William Scally, and Steven M. Veenema 111 SW Columbia Street, Suite 750, Portland, OR 97201 (503) 479-8200 • www.bvresources.com SEVENTH EDITION Copyright © 2023 by Business Valuation Resources, LLC (BVR). All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reprinted, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except as ...
Patent Infringement Damages: Lost Profits and Royalties
If a patent owner can prove another company or party has made, used or sold a product covered by a patent without its permission, the patent owner is entitled, under 35 U.S.C. Section 284, to receive “damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court.” This program focuses ...
Calculating But-For Profits
Do you feel like being asked to calculate but-for-profits feels like an engagement in another dimension? Calculating the position the harmed party would have been in “but for” the alleged acts is an advanced skill for appraisers. Join expert and contributing author to The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Stacey Udell, for a discussion of different strategies to determine net lost profits including the critical step of removing incremental costs that did not occur. Every ...