Some Key Takeaways From the AICPA FVS Conference
Over 1,100 attendees converged on Las Vegas for the AICPA Forensic and Valuation Services Conference 2015. BVU was there and heard some outstanding speakers and topics. Covered below are just a few of the takeaways. Future issues will cover these—and more.
Destruction of financial evidence trips up guilty party's own experts
As a damages expert, what do you do when your own client has destroyed vital financial information? Two highly educated finance professionals working on a contract case solved this dilemma by relying exclusively on the opposing side's sales projections, only to see their analysis buckle under a Daubert challenge.
SIGA Technologies, Inc. v. PharmAthene, Inc.
In major pharmaceutical case, state Supreme Court finds DE Chancery did not abuse its discretion when it awarded plaintiff lump-sum expectation damages and its findings supporting the new damages determination were not clearly erroneously.
Mississippi high court sets record straight on assessing economic damages
A Mississippi trial court’s cavalier approach to determining economic damages in a dispute involving allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and usurpation of a business opportunity triggered a petition with the state Supreme Court to clarify the applicable measure of damages. The trial court used the wrong standard and accounting procedures for calculating the loss to the plaintiff, the Supreme Court decided.
Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.
Federal Circuit upholds lost profits award based on adjusted market share analysis, finding expert accounted for huge price disparity between patentee’s product and infringer’s product and based market elasticity discount on sound economic principles.
Court Emphasizes Benefit of Hindsight in Evaluating Loss Period
Court finds business valuator is qualified under Daubert to proffer lost profits calculation relying on statistics methods and says expert’s loss period is not a mere “guess” because hindsight reduces years of uncertainty as to relevant market conditions.
Charron v. Sallyport Global Holdings, Inc.
In a buyout case, the court finds that, in reselling company, defendants undervalued rollover equity interest by double counting risks specific to the company in order to avoid triggering windfall provision in prior sales agreement favorable to plaintiff.
Failure to Specify Offset Value Does Not Preclude Expert’s Admissibility
In contract dispute, court finds defendant expert’s testimony regarding offset value of new equipment plaintiff installed in reliance on contract is relevant under Daubert even though expert fails to state precise monetary benefit to plaintiff.
Packgen v. Berry Plastics Corp. (I)
Court finds business valuator is qualified under Daubert to proffer lost profits calculation relying on statistics methods and says expert’s loss period is not a mere “guess” because hindsight reduces years of uncertainty as to relevant market conditions.
Lost Value Opinion Using Untested Data Points Is No Go
Court excludes lost value opinion from expert who was versed in business valuation, but unfamiliar with scientific damages methodologies and did not test reliability of sources providing data points for damages calculations.
Dominion Liquid Technologies, LLC v. GT Beverage Co., LLC
In contract dispute, court finds defendant expert’s testimony regarding offset value of new equipment plaintiff installed in reliance on contract is relevant under Daubert even though expert fails to state precise monetary benefit to plaintiff.
Antioch Co. Litig. Trust v. Morgan
Court excludes lost value opinion from expert who was versed in business valuation, but unfamiliar with scientific damages methodologies and did not test reliability of sources providing data points for damages calculations.
Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Zynga, Inc.
Court denies defendant’s Daubert motion finding plaintiff expert determined royalty base consistent with plaintiff’s infringement theory that defendant’s entire product infringed and the product was not functional without the patented technology.
Federal Circuit Affirms $95 Million Patent Award Based on Price Erosion Theory
Federal Circuit finds jury’s lost profits and reasonable royalty award based on plaintiffs’ price erosion theory is not excessive; sufficient evidence supported expert’s “but for” damages model calculating prices two to three times as much as the prices t ...
SSL Services, LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc.
District court denies defendants’ post-trial challenge to $10 million jury award finding the fact that the patent assignee at the time of the hypothetical negotiation was worth less than its single patent-in-suit does not control the assessment of patent ...
Inclusion of Inflated Purchase Price Does Not Doom Damages Calculation
District court finds expert’s damages calculation in securities case is not unreliable simply because it incorporates inflated purchase; expert also performed an event study and regression analysis to assess the effect of misrepresentation on inflated pri ...