Working Effectively With Attorneys (How to Be a Better Expert)
You’ve honed your valuation skills through education, training, and experience and have been educating clients about what their businesses have been worth for years. Now litigation counsel is asking you to educate judges and juries about the economics of a complex commercial dispute. The best way to be an effective expert, in addition to having those well-honed skills, is to gain an understanding of both the litigation forum and the general needs of counsel. This ...
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.
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.”
Springer v. Library Store
Court upholds lower court ruling that there was no mismanagement of corporate assets; plaintiff failed to show excessive officer compensation and was properly precluded from using testifying expert to introduce another appraiser’s report on excessive rent.
Court Clarifies Application of Rule 703 to Expert Testimony
Court upholds lower court ruling that there was no mismanagement of corporate assets; plaintiff failed to show excessive officer compensation and was properly precluded from using testifying expert to introduce another appraiser’s report on excessive rent.
Expert’s Exclusion Dooms ‘Frozen Market’ Theory and Loss of Value Claims
Court excludes expert damages calculation where expert relied solely on “temporal relationship” to show causation between loss of value in plaintiff’s business and defendants’ actions and did not account for alternative explanation for plaintiff’s loss.
Expert’s Exclusion Dooms ‘Frozen Market’ Theory and Loss of Value Claims
Court excludes expert damages calculation where expert relied solely on “temporal relationship” to show causation between loss of value in plaintiff’s business and defendants’ actions and did not account for alternative explanation for plaintiff’s loss.
TiVo Research & Analytics, Inc. v. TNS Media Research
Court excludes expert damages calculation where expert relied solely on “temporal relationship” to show causation between loss of value in plaintiff’s business and defendants’ actions and did not account for alternative explanation for plaintiff’s loss.
‘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.
Failure to Test Causation Narrative Clouds Analysis of Lost Profits
Court strikes parts of lost profits opinion, finding expert adopted plaintiff’s causation theory, “pinning the company’s overall financial performance” on defendants’ allegedly defective crane without offering supporting data or methodology to test theory ...
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.
FRE 702 Ruling Puts Expert in ‘Uncommon Position’
Court affirms magistrate judge’s decision to exclude expert’s ultimate conclusions but to admit his factual statements; under Rule 702, he had the specialized knowledge to provide background information helpful to court’s understanding of the evidence.
Court Endorses Before and After Method for Lost Profits
In Daubert case, court accepts before and after method for lost profits and diminution of value calculation but excludes parts of expert testimony because they merely restated company assumptions and conclusions without undergoing testing from the expert.
Am. Aerial Servs. v. Terex United States
Court strikes parts of lost profits opinion, finding expert adopted plaintiff’s causation theory, “pinning the company’s overall financial performance” on defendants’ allegedly defective crane without offering supporting data or methodology to test theory ...
Advanced Drainage Sys. v. Quality Culvert, Inc.
In Daubert case, court accepts before and after method for lost profits and diminution of value calculation but excludes parts of expert testimony because they merely restated company assumptions and conclusions without undergoing testing from the expert.
Ross v. Rothstein
Court affirms magistrate judge’s decision to exclude expert’s ultimate conclusions but to admit his factual statements; under Rule 702, he had the specialized knowledge to provide background information helpful to court’s understanding of the evidence.
‘Undue’ Scrutiny of Expert’s Data Triggers Erroneous Exclusion
Seventh Circuit overturns district court’s decision to exclude plaintiff expert’s business loss calculation, finding the lower court “exercised its role as gatekeeper under Daubert with too much vigor” when it “unduly” scrutinized the quality of the exper ...
Manpower, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania (III)
Seventh Circuit overturns district court’s decision to exclude plaintiff expert’s business loss calculation, finding the lower court “exercised its role as gatekeeper under Daubert with too much vigor” when it “unduly” scrutinized the quality of the exper ...
Uniloc v. Microsoft Special Report: Lessons Outside of the Courtroom
In a U.S. Federal Court of Appeals decision issued on January 4 in the case of Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation (Uniloc), the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a damage expert’s reliance of the “25% rule of thumb” in determining a reasonable royalty rate was inadmissible under Federal Rules of Evidence.
Keller v. United States (I)
In this estate tax case, portions of an appraisal report were challenged as inadmissible.
Sec. 2036 Exception Requires Case-By-Case Analysis
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas denied the government’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of the applicability of sec. 2036 to look through a FLP.
What's new online at BVLibrary.com
BVLibrary is a website designed with the business valuation professional in mind. It offers instant access to the latest business valuation research ...