Damages Calculation Admissible Under Facts Available to PI Expert
Court says P.I. expert properly based economic loss determination on plaintiff’s actual work situation at time of expert report instead of speculating about future earnings; testimony is helpful to jury because it explains issues not usually encountered.
Court Clarifies Rule 26 Protection for ‘Reporting’ and ‘Non-reporting’ Experts
Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.
Daubert Flexible as to Solvency Determination for Multiple Debtor Entities
Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.
Rebuttal Opinion Helpful to Jury Because Valuation ‘Not a Common-Sense Subject’
Court declines to exclude rebuttal damages testimony, noting rebuttal expert’s professional background and qualifications were similar to that of principal expert and rebuttal opinion was helpful to jury in assessing principal expert’s damages calculation.
Court Clarifies Rule 26 Protection for ‘Reporting’ and ‘Non-Reporting’ Experts
Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.
Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Liown Elecs. Co.
Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.
Spencer Franchise Servs. of Ga. v. WOW Café & Wingery Franchising Account, LLC
Court declines to exclude rebuttal damages testimony, noting rebuttal expert’s professional background and qualifications were similar to that of principal expert and rebuttal opinion was helpful to jury in assessing principal expert’s damages calculation ...
Daubert Flexible as to Solvency Determination for Multiple Debtor Entities
Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.
Post-Confirmation Comm. for Small Loans, Inc. v. Martin
Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.
‘Blunderbuss of Objections’ Aims to Kill Loss of Goodwill Calculation
Defendant’s “blunderbuss of objections” to opposing expert’s valuation of loss of goodwill misses mark, 7th Circuit says; expert used a standard business valuation method and his reliance on company financials was justified under rules of evidence.
Expert Rebuttal Fails to Engage With Initial Valuation
Court excludes so-called rebuttal report where expert failed to review the initial expert report but instead contradicted the opposing party’s main contention; proponent’s attempt to append report to proper rebuttal valuation testimony is “gamesmanship.”
Daubert Allows for Generous View on Yardstick Analysis
Court rejects bright-line reliability test for yardstick analysis, saying expert’s failure to find a “nearly identical” comparator did not render analysis unreliable and inadmissible under Daubert and finding companies were similar in material respects.
No Place for Asset Appraisal in Trust Dispute, Court Says
In trust dispute, appeals court affirms trial court’s exclusion of expert’s “asset appraisal and valuation,” finding business valuator’s approach for measuring damages was inconsistent with scope of the case, irrelevant, and not helpful to trier of fact.
Tilstra v. Boumatic LLC
Defendant’s “blunderbuss of objections” to opposing expert’s valuation of loss of goodwill misses mark, 7th Circuit says; expert used a standard business valuation method and his reliance on company financials was justified under rules of evidence.
Clear-View Technologies, Inc. v. Rasnick (II)
Court excludes so-called rebuttal report where expert failed to review the initial expert report but instead contradicted the opposing party’s main contention; proponent’s attempt to append report to proper rebuttal valuation testimony is “gamesmanship.”
Clear-View Technologies, Inc. v. Rasnick (I)
Court excludes so-called rebuttal report where expert failed to review the initial expert report but instead contradicted the opposing party’s main contention; proponent’s attempt to append report to proper rebuttal valuation testimony is “gamesmanship.”
Can a Valuation Firm Serve as Expert Witness?
Chancery says defendant’s valuation expert cannot be corporate entity, i.e., its investment banker, because only a biological person may serve as an expert witness; but firm may substitute a managing director provided he first has adopted expert reports.
Cartwright v. Jackson Capital Partners, Ltd. P'ship
In trust dispute, appeals court affirms trial court’s exclusion of expert’s “asset appraisal and valuation,” finding business valuator’s approach for measuring damages was inconsistent with scope of the case, irrelevant, and not helpful to trier of fact.
Washington v. Kellwood Co. (I)
Court rejects bright-line reliability test for yardstick analysis, saying expert’s failure to find a “nearly identical” comparator did not render analysis unreliable and inadmissible under Daubert and finding companies were similar in material respects.
In re Dole Food Co. (Dole II)
Chancery says defendant’s valuation expert cannot be corporate entity, i.e., its investment banker, because only a biological person may serve as an expert witness; but firm may substitute a managing director provided he first has adopted expert reports.
Court Nixes Murky Business Goodwill Determination
Appeals court rejects business goodwill award to the husband as a community asset, finding there was no goodwill in the business entities, as the trial court well knew; the determination is based entirely on the expectancy of husband’s future earnings.
Crews v. Crews
Appeals court rejects business goodwill award to the husband as a community asset, finding there was no goodwill in the business entities, as the trial court well knew; the determination is based entirely on the expectancy of husband’s future earnings.
Court Proscribes Litigant’s Efforts to Foil Expert’s Valuation
Court admits expert’s testimony despite his failure to appear for scheduled deposition where husband’s refusal to provide necessary corporate information delayed expert’s completion of the business valuation and says any error in the opinion was “invited”
Chattree v. Chattree
Court admits expert’s testimony despite his failure to appear for scheduled deposition where husband’s refusal to provide necessary corporate information delayed expert’s completion of the business valuation and says any error in the opinion was “invited”
Federal Court Clarifies When IRS Can Subpoena Appraiser’s Work File
9th Circuit confirms that IRS may subpoena appraiser’s work files when the taxpayers’ liability has not yet been “finally determined”—and also no privilege or protections when the report was prepared primarily to comply with tax laws.