Expand the following panels for additional search options.

In Re Cellular Tel. P’ship Litig.

In this coordinated action involving 13 partnerships that were involved in freeze-out transactions by AT&T of minority shareholders, AT&T breached its fiduciary duties and effectuated the freeze-out through an unfair process and by paying an unfair price. The freeze-out was subject to the entire fairness standard of review. AT&T bore the burden of proving that the freeze-out was entirely fair to the minority partners. AT&T failed in that proof and thereby sought to capture future value for itself. AT&T did not employ any procedures that insured fairness to the minority partners. The lead partner of the valuation firm had a long-standing relationship with AT&T, and internal AT&T personnel influenced the outcome of the valuation. The court determined the fair value of the interest as a remedy to the situation.

Delaware Chancery Court Rejects Partnership Valuation in a Freeze-Out as Unfair to Minority Partners

In this coordinated action involving 13 partnerships that were involved in freeze-out transactions by AT&T of minority shareholders, AT&T breached its fiduciary duties and effectuated the freeze-out through an unfair process and by paying an unfair price. The freeze-out was subject to the entire fairness standard of review. AT&T bore the burden of proving that the freeze-out was entirely fair to the minority partners. AT&T failed in that proof and thereby sought to capture future value for itself. AT&T did not employ any procedures that insured fairness to the minority partners. The lead partner of the valuation firm had a long-standing relationship with AT&T, and internal AT&T personnel influenced the outcome of the valuation. The court determined the fair value of the interest as a remedy to the situation.

Expert Qualified to Offer Unit Valuation of Telecom Property

In tax assessment case, court finds valuation expert qualified under Rule 702 despite lacking an appraiser’s license; court says rule specifically contemplates expert opinion on property valuation by nonappraisers if witness is qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.”

Level 3 Communications, LLC v. Dep’t of Revenue

In tax assessment case, court finds valuation expert qualified under Rule 702 despite lacking an appraiser’s license; court says rule specifically contemplates expert opinion on property valuation by nonappraisers if witness is qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.”

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.

Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple, Inc. (VI)

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.

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.

Federal Circuit Resists Samsung’s ‘Quest for Apportionment’

Federal Circuit rejects Samsung’s call for apportioning damages related to design patent infringement, saying the proposed treatment would conflict with the express language of the applicable statute; court upholds most of $1 billion award to Apple.

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (V)

Federal Circuit rejects Samsung’s call for apportioning damages related to design patent infringement, saying the proposed treatment would conflict with the express language of the applicable statute; court upholds most of $1 billion award to Apple.

Forecast’s Assumption Imperils Conjoined Expert Opinions

In breach of contract suit, court strikes expert’s revenue forecasts, using Monte Carlo simulation, finding key assumption resulted from expert’s misreading of contract; court also strikes second expert’s valuation resting on inadmissible forecasts.

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.

Myservice Force v. Am. Home Shield

In breach of contract suit, court strikes expert’s revenue forecasts, using Monte Carlo simulation, finding key assumption resulted from expert’s misreading of contract; court also strikes second expert’s valuation resting on inadmissible forecasts.

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (IV)

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.

Experts Propose Equally Sound, but Diverging, Valuations

Appellate court upholds valuation of husband’s business where trial court faced two equally plausible values from experienced appraisers who gave “reasoned explanations” for their differing choices as to the treatment of a year with unusually high income ...

Apple Fails in Last-Ditch Effort to Offer Nonexpert Lost Profits Theory

District court grants Samsung’s emergency motion to preclude Apple from introducing a lost profits theory for several patents that runs counter to the Panduit-based damages model its own experts had developed, calling the new, non-expert alternative theor ...

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (III)

District court grants Samsung’s emergency motion to preclude Apple from introducing a lost profits theory for several patents that runs counter to the Panduit-based damages model its own experts had developed, calling the new, non-expert alternative theor ...

Myhre v. Myhre

Appellate court upholds valuation of husband’s business where trial court faced two equally plausible values from experienced appraisers who gave “reasoned explanations” for their differing choices as to the treatment of a year with unusually high income ...

Expert’s ‘Aggressively Skeptical’ View Does Not Undermine Disaggregation Analysis

In securities case, the federal court denies the defendants’ post-trial motion to upset the jury’s €765 million verdict, finding the plaintiffs’ expert’s loss causation and damages analysis was not defective; taking an “aggressively skeptical view” of the ...

Expert’s ‘Aggressive’ Damages Theory Necessitates New Trial

In patent case, federal court strikes $450 million from $1 billion award and orders a new damages trial, finding the plaintiff’s expert used an improper, “aggressive,” notice date regarding some patents and the jury awarded impermissible forms of compensa ...

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (II)

In patent case, federal court strikes $450 million from $1 billion award and orders a new damages trial, finding the plaintiff’s expert used an improper, “aggressive,” notice date regarding some patents and the jury awarded impermissible forms of compensa ...

Liberty Media Corp. v. Vivendi Universal, S.A.

In securities case, the federal court denies the defendants’ post-trial motion to upset the jury’s €765 million verdict, finding the plaintiffs’ expert’s loss causation and damages analysis was not defective; taking an “aggressively skeptical view” of the ...

What It Takes to Succeed on a Patent Apportionment Analysis

Federal district court precludes defendant’s expert from apportioning damages for infringement of a design patent (as opposed to utility patent) as contrary to the statutory remedy, but denies most Daubert objections against the plaintiff’s expert.

Patent Expert Asserts Flawed License and Legal Conclusions

Federal district court precludes defendant’s expert from apportioning damages for infringement of a design patent (as opposed to utility patent) as contrary to the statutory remedy, but denies most Daubert objections against the plaintiff’s expert.

In re Iridium Operating LLC

Bankruptcy court confirms that the market price of a public company is the more reliable measure of equity value than experts’ “subjective” estimates, particularly when they do not adequately explain, rebut, or analyze contemporaneous market valuations.

Last-Minute Efforts to Save Patent Claims Sans Damages Experts

After excluding the parties’ damages experts under Daubert, the court finds no credible evidence remains to support their claims for patent infringement, damages, or equitable relief (either permanent injunctions or prospective royalties).

1 - 25 of 81 results