Gutierrez v. Padilla
The plaintiffs bought two automotive supply businesses from the defendant. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant and the defendant’s broker made representations about the condition of the businesses during the sale and breached various terms of the sale contract. The district court dismissed complaints against the defendant’s broker and awarded damages to both parties regarding alleged actions in regard to the sale contract. The appeals court affirmed the district court’s decisions.
New Mexico Appeals Court Affirms Awards of Damages to Both Parties on Claims of Breach of Contract
The plaintiffs bought two automotive supply businesses from the defendant. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant and the defendant’s broker made representations about the condition of the businesses during the sale and breached various terms of the sale contract. The district court dismissed complaints against the defendant’s broker and awarded damages to both parties regarding alleged actions in regard to the sale contract. The appeals court affirmed the district court’s decisions.
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.
Eurochem North America Corp. v. Ganske
Court finds proposed expert testimony inadmissible under Rule 702 and Daubert where expert did not himself prepare the value determination, conceded any estimate of value by his firm was prepared for marketing purposes, and where damages model that expert testimony supported was fatally flawed.
Lack of Valuation Credentials Does Not Disqualify Expert, but Failure to Perform Valuation Does, Court Finds
Court finds proposed expert testimony inadmissible under Rule 702 and Daubert where expert did not himself prepare the value determination, conceded any estimate of value by his firm was prepared for marketing purposes, and where damages model that expert testimony supported was fatally flawed.
Don’t assume causation, AICPA panel warns damages experts
Causation presents one of the most vexing problems for damages experts. But ignoring causation and simply working off the assumption that it exists may end up being the biggest problem for an expert.