Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Discovery dispute over damages expert’s undisclosed work paper

In a discovery dispute, a federal court recently found the defendant had no duty to disclose to the opposing side its expert’s “intermediary” working paper that he used to prepare his damages calculation.

Whitesell Corp. v. Electrolux Home Prods.

In this Rule 26 discovery case, court says sanctions are inappropriate where the defendant had no duty to disclose its expert’s “intermediary” working paper; however, sanctions are appropriate related to the expert’s miscalculations; court finds expert testimony is admissible under Daubert.

Expert’s Damages Testimony Prompts Motion for Sanctions and Motion to Exclude Under Daubert

In this Rule 26 discovery case, court says sanctions are inappropriate where the defendant had no duty to disclose its expert’s “intermediary” working paper; however, sanctions are appropriate related to the expert’s miscalculations; court finds expert testimony is admissible under Daubert.

Innovation Ventures, L.L.C. v. Custom Nutrition Labs., L.L.C.

This case involves a consideration of motions by both the plaintiff and the defendant to exclude the testimony of the other party’s expert witness on the basis of Daubert and the Federal Rules of Evidence. The plaintiff’s expert offered testimony on how to calculate lost profits based on the plaintiff’s market share. The defendant’s expert offered testimony as to weaknesses in the plaintiff’s calculations and opinions on damages. The court denied both of these cross-motions.

The District Court Refuses to Throw Out Experts Under Daubert Motions, Citing Differences in Admissibility and Scrutiny Under Cross-Examination

This case involves a consideration of motions by both the plaintiff and the defendant to exclude the testimony of the other party’s expert witness on the basis of Daubert and the Federal Rules of Evidence. The plaintiff’s expert offered testimony on how to calculate lost profits based on the plaintiff’s market share. The defendant’s expert offered testimony as to weaknesses in the plaintiff’s calculations and opinions on damages. The court denied both of these cross-motions.

The Top Valuation and Damages Cases of 2020

Our pick of valuation-related court cases includes state and federal court decisions covering many areas of law that dealt with novel issues of law or, in some way, enhanced our understanding of valuation and damages issues as they arose in a litigation setting.

Solvency opinion based on management projections faces Daubert challenge

In a bankruptcy-cum-Daubert case that turned on solvency, a court recently rejected both parties’ claims that the opposing financial expert testimony was inadmissible.

Maryland commits to Daubert for evaluating admissibility of expert testimony

In a critical move, Maryland’s highest court recently changed the standard for the admission of expert testimony when it abandoned the existing two-channel approach in favor of Daubert.

Rochkind v. Stevenson

In a split decision featuring a long-running tort case that hinged on medical expert testimony regarding plaintiff’s claims of lead poising, divided state high court abandons two-channel approach, including Frye general acceptance test, for Daubert standard of admissibility of expert testimony.

Split Maryland High Court Adopts Daubert for Testing Admissibility of Expert Testimony

In a split decision featuring a long-running tort case that hinged on medical expert testimony regarding plaintiff’s claims of lead poising, divided state high court abandons two-channel approach, including Frye general acceptance test, for Daubert standard of admissibility of expert testimony.

Experts Need Not Be ‘Blue-Ribbon Practitioners’ to Meet Rule 702 Qualification Requirement

In bankruptcy dispute, court rejects parties’ Daubert challenge to opposing expert testimony; defense expert did not blindly rely on management projections for capital adequacy and balance sheet tests, and plaintiff’s expert did not use hindsight to find debtor was insolvent on fund transfer dates.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Calpers Corp. Partners, LLC

In bankruptcy dispute, court rejects parties’ Daubert challenge to opposing expert testimony; defense expert did not blindly rely on management projections for capital adequacy and balance sheet tests, and plaintiff’s expert did not use hindsight to find debtor was insolvent on fund transfer dates.

Expert’s Damages Calculation Based on Extensive Experience in Field Is Reliable, Court Finds

Court admits survey evidence, finding expert’s methodology conformed to accepted principles in the field and noting that technical objections go toward weight; court also admits both parties’ damages experts, finding they had extensive experience in the field and were both qualified; questions as to reliability of method “can be explored at trial.”

Geiger v. Creative Impact Inc.

Court admits survey evidence, finding expert’s methodology conformed to accepted principles in the field and noting that technical objections go toward weight; court also admits both parties’ damages experts, finding they had extensive experience in the field and were both qualified; questions as to reliability of method “can be explored at trial.”

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.

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.

Valuers and Forensics Experts Converge at the 2019 AICPA FVS Conference

A mix of topics had something for everyone at this conference. Of note were some excellent sessions on expert testimony and there was a definite emphasis on fair value for financial reporting.

2019 Key Valuation and Damages Cases

A discussion of the court cases that have dominated the conversation in 2019 among financial experts by making law or influencing attitudes on key valuation issues.

Manichaean Capital, LLC v. SourceHOV Holdings, Inc.

In appraisal proceeding, Court of Chancery adopts petitioner expert’s DCF-based model for calculating fair value, making slight adjustment to expert’s size premium; on beta calculation, court finds respondent expert’s novel approach “does not survive judicial scrutiny” and raises Daubert issues.

Novel Beta Method Occasions Rebuke From Court of Chancery in Appraisal Case

In appraisal proceeding, Court of Chancery adopts petitioner expert’s DCF-based model for calculating fair value, making slight adjustment to expert’s size premium; on beta calculation, court finds respondent expert’s novel approach “does not survive judicial scrutiny” and raises Daubert issues.

Court Decides Daubert Exclusion of Expert Testimony for Failure to Apportion Is Premature

In trade secrets dispute, court denies defendant’s Daubert motion, finding exclusion of opposing damages expert testimony for failure to apportion is premature; whether or not entire market value rule applies is determination for jury “after hearing all the documentary and testimonial evidence.”

Pawelko v. Hasbro, Inc.

In trade secrets dispute, court denies defendant’s Daubert motion, finding exclusion of opposing damages expert testimony for failure to apportion is premature; whether or not entire market value rule applies is determination for jury “after hearing all the documentary and testimonial evidence.”

BVU News and Trends November 2019

A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.

Survey of Daubert Challenges to Experts Suggests Red Flags to Avoid

In 2018, appraisers had the lowest exclusion rate among all types of financial experts facing a Daubert challenge, reveals the current edition of an annual PwC survey. The article also presents some tips on how to avoid a challenge.

Parties fight over notes-containing expert report: draft or final version?

Several sessions at the recent AICPA conference in Las Vegas highlighted the importance of expert discovery in litigation and noted that draft reports continue to be a hot-button issue.

1 - 25 of 370 results