Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. SIG Growth Equity Fund I, LLP
Court rejects plaintiff’s damages calculation related to sweeping fraud and contract breach allegations where plaintiff submitted expert report before court’s liability rulings and failed to offer revised expert report after liability trial; damages were not sufficiently tied to proven wrongs.
Plaintiff’s Overbroad Damages Calculation Prompts Court Not to Grant Award for Proven Wrongdoing
Court rejects plaintiff’s damages calculation related to sweeping fraud and contract breach allegations where plaintiff submitted expert report before court’s liability rulings and failed to offer revised expert report after liability trial; damages were not sufficiently tied to proven wrongs.
Lost profits claims fail to meet New York’s strict standard
Establishing lost profits under New York law can be difficult.
IceMOS Tech. Corp. v. Omron Corp.
In contract dispute, court denies defendant’s Daubert motions, finding plaintiff’s experts are qualified based on extensive experience in relevant industry; experts could provide testimony relevant to surviving lost development support costs claim and their testimony is not unreliable as of now.
Plaintiff’s Projections Fail to Meet New York Test for Lost Profits or Lost Business Value
A breach of contract case in which the plaintiff asked for various types of economic damages is noteworthy for the court s extended discussion of what the plaintiff must show under New York law to make a case for lost profits. The court explained that the hurdle was particularly high for a new business or a business trying to break into a new market considering the company s lack of a financial track record. Damages must be ...
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.
Plaintiff’s Projections Fail to Meet New York Test for Lost Profits or Lost Business Value
A breach of contract case in which the plaintiff asked for various types of economic damages is noteworthy for the court s extended discussion of what the plaintiff must show under New York law to make a case for lost profits. The court explained that the hurdle was particularly high for a new business or a business trying to break into a new market considering the company s lack of a financial track record. Damages must be ...
My Imagination v. M.Z. Berger & Co. (II)
Court denies plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, affirming earlier finding that the expert did not offer an opinion as to damages for loss of business value; expert never offered any opinion of business’s value at any time, court says.
Cargotec Corp. v. Logan Industries
Appeals court majority strikes down lost profits and diminished business value awards, finding plaintiff failed to show causation and its damages expert based his calculations on management’s business plan without substantiating the plan’s underlying (unreasonable) gross profit goals.
Court’s Majority Says Expert’s Reliance on Management Projections Was Unreasonable
Appeals court majority strikes down lost profits and diminished business value awards, finding plaintiff failed to show causation and its damages expert based his calculations on management’s business plan without substantiating the plan’s underlying (unreasonable) gross profit goals.
Court Limits Damages for Copyright Infringement, Noting Lack of ‘Causal Nexus’
Ruling on defendant’s post-trial motions, court reduces damages for copyright infringement where plaintiff’s expert included in damage calculation defendant’s profits for years for which the plaintiff failed to show “causal nexus” between profits claimed and the actual infringement.
Infogroup, Inc. v. Database USA.com LLC
Ruling on defendant’s post-trial motions, court reduces damages for copyright infringement where plaintiff’s expert included in damage calculation defendant’s profits for years for which the plaintiff failed to show “causal nexus” between profits claimed and the actual infringement.
Court Says Daubert’s ‘Gatekeeper’ Role Favors Inclusion, Not Exclusion
In contract and tort case, court declines to exclude plaintiff’s damages expert, noting court’s gatekeeping function “is not a role that emphasizes exclusion of expert testimony”; expert’s background in economics and business valuation experience qualified him to value subject company.
Ferraro v. Convercent, Inc.
In contract and tort case, court declines to exclude plaintiff’s damages expert, noting court’s gatekeeping function “is not a role that emphasizes exclusion of expert testimony”; expert’s background in economics and business valuation experience qualified him to value subject company.
Zayo Group v. Latisys Holdings, LLC
In contract dispute, Chancery rejects plaintiff’s damages analysis, noting expert lacked valuation experience and chose a methodology (EBITDA multiple) that did not fit facts of case; court says there was no evidence that the alleged breach permanently diminished value of the acquired company.
Expert’s Use of Wrong Damages Methodology Results in ‘Grossly Inflated’ Damages
In contract dispute, Chancery rejects plaintiff’s damages analysis, noting expert lacked valuation experience and chose a methodology (EBITDA multiple) that did not fit facts of case; court says there was no evidence that the alleged breach permanently diminished value of the acquired company.
Court Concludes Plaintiff Cannot Satisfy Three-Part New York Lost Profits Test
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.”
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.”
Blind Reliance on Client Data and Wide-Ranging Values Gut New Venture Valuation
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.
Lightbox Ventures, LLC v. 3 RD Home Ltd.
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.
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.
Washington v. Kellwood Co. (IV)
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.
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.
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.
Horizon Health Corp. v. Acadia Healthcare Co.
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.