Business Valuation Update Yearbook, 2023 Edition
January 2023 PDF, Softcover (426 pages)
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
Endless River Techs. LLC v. Trans Union LLC
The plaintiff sued for damages in relation to termination of a contract requiring the plaintiff to develop software for use by the defendant in comparing real-time online insurance quotes insurers give to their customers. The defendant terminated the contract and admittedly breached the contract. A jury awarded the plaintiff $18.3 million in damages relating to the breach. However, the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant had a liability limiting clause, which prohibited recovery of “consequential damages.” After reviewing motions by the parties, the judge sided with the defendant in determining that the damages awarded were “consequential damages” and not “direct damages” and were not allowed under the contract between the parties.
U.S. District Court Overturns Jury Award for Consequential Damages
The plaintiff sued for damages in relation to termination of a contract requiring the plaintiff to develop software for use by the defendant in comparing real-time online insurance quotes insurers give to their customers. The defendant terminated the contract and admittedly breached the contract. A jury awarded the plaintiff $18.3 million in damages relating to the breach. However, the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant had a liability limiting clause, which prohibited recovery of “consequential damages.” After reviewing motions by the parties, the judge sided with the defendant in determining that the damages awarded were “consequential damages” and not “direct damages” and were not allowed under the contract between the parties.
Recap of the New Jersey CPA Society FVS Conference
Some excellent speakers covered litigation tips, malpractice, estate tax audits, statistics for lost profits, cryptocurrency, and divorce matters at the Forensic and Valuation Services Conference hosted by the New Jersey Society of Certified Public Accountants (NJCPA ...
Commercial Success in Patent Litigation
To obtain a United States patent, the claimed invention may not be obvious in view of prior art. Whether a claimed invention is obvious often arises during the examination of a patent application by the United States Patent & Trademark Office. After a patent issues, obviousness may again arise as a defense to infringement by an accused infringer in litigation or as a basis for invalidity by a petitioner in post-grant proceedings, such as Inter-Partes ...
Global BV News: New CBV Insight on damages published
A new paper examines two damages approaches generally used in a disputed matter: reliance damages and expectation damages.
Six things to know from the NJCPA BV conference
While we enjoy attending the major valuation conferences, we also look forward to attending local state CPA society conferences that focus on valuation.
Ohio Appellate Court Affirms Trial Court’s Denial of Permanent Injunction and Dismisses a Claim of Tortious Interference
An Ohio appellate court affirmed the trial court’s denial of a permanent injunction to the plaintiff because the evidence did not show that it faced immediate and irreparable injury or harm. It was also held that the trial court properly dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for tortious interference because the plaintiff did not allege that the defendant induced a third party not to continue to do business with the plaintiff.
Total Quality Logistics, LLC v. Tucker, Albin and Assocs.
An Ohio appellate court affirmed the trial court’s denial of a permanent injunction to the plaintiff because the evidence did not show that it faced immediate and irreparable injury or harm. It was also held that the trial court properly dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for tortious interference because the plaintiff did not allege that the defendant induced a third party not to continue to do business with the plaintiff.
Damages expert dodges exclusion bullet
In a patent infringement case in Tennessee, the defendants filed a motion to exclude the testimony of the damages expert for the plaintiffs.
Appellate court KOs damages method for soybean farm
A CPA who specializes in damages used three ways to calculate damages to a Louisiana soybean farm caused by someone who was supposed to be checking for insects.
Business Valuation Update Yearbook, 2022 Edition
January 2022 PDF (454 pages)
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
Use of DCF for damages survives challenge
In an antitrust lawsuit in Nevada, the expert for a company that alleges it was forced to close due to anticompetitive practices used the discounted cash flow (DCF) method to calculate damages.
Xodus Med. v. Prime Med. (II)
This was a patent infringement case related to technology “related to patient slippage within the context of the Trendelenburg position for surgery—when using a viscoelastic foam.” Ivan T. Hoffmann was the plaintiffs’ damages expert. The defendants sought to exclude Hoffmann’s testimony on lost profits and his opinion of the reasonable royalty. Lost profits should be excluded because “he fails to tie consumer demand for products to the patented features of those products,” and he “does not establish … that, but for the alleged infringement, Plaintiffs would have made each and every sale made by Defendants.” Hoffman’s reasonable royalty analysis should be excluded because Hofmann’s royalty rate calculation of $20.00 represents a 141.8% increase to his $8.27 per unit “starting point,” and he provided no explanation for this substantial increase. The plaintiffs argued that the defendants’ quibbles with Hoffman’s opinion was the stuff of cross-examination but not exclusion. The defendants’ motion was denied.
Court Denies Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony—The Subject of the Testimony Is the Subject of Cross-Examination but Not Exclusion
This was a patent infringement case related to technology “related to patient slippage within the context of the Trendelenburg position for surgery—when using a viscoelastic foam.” Ivan T. Hoffmann was the plaintiffs’ damages expert. The defendants sought to exclude Hoffmann’s testimony on lost profits and his opinion of the reasonable royalty. Lost profits should be excluded because “he fails to tie consumer demand for products to the patented features of those products,” and he “does not establish … that, but for the alleged infringement, Plaintiffs would have made each and every sale made by Defendants.” Hoffman’s reasonable royalty analysis should be excluded because Hofmann’s royalty rate calculation of $20.00 represents a 141.8% increase to his $8.27 per unit “starting point,” and he provided no explanation for this substantial increase. The plaintiffs argued that the defendants’ quibbles with Hoffman’s opinion was the stuff of cross-examination but not exclusion. The defendants’ motion was denied.
Appeals Court Decides Trial Court Abused Its Discretion in Choosing the Method of Determining Damages
In this case alleging damages to a soybean crop, a Louisiana court of appeals determined that the trial court abused its discretion when it chose an expert's methodology for calculating damages, as another methodology was supported by the record and was not overly speculative; a reduced damage award was appropriate. The trial court affirmed two other issues regarding evidence of cause of damages and the issue of standing as to who owned the land and thus the crops.
Dettenhaim Farms, Inc. v. Greenpoint Ag, LLC
In this case alleging damages to a soybean crop, a Louisiana court of appeals determined that the trial court abused its discretion when it chose an expert's methodology for calculating damages, as another methodology was supported by the record and was not overly speculative; a reduced damage award was appropriate. The trial court affirmed two other issues regarding evidence of cause of damages and the issue of standing as to who owned the land and thus the crops.
Court Reverses Its Order to Strike Expert Testimony That Utilized the Discounted Cash Flow Method in Valuing a Business
This case was a motion to reconsider the court’s ruling that struck expert testimony because the expert used the discounted cash flow method to determine the value of a business that went out of business. Upon reconsideration, the court decided that such method was allowable in this case and, therefore, the testimony should be reinstated and presented to the jury for use in determining damages.
V5 Techs., LLC v. Switch, Ltd.
This case was a motion to reconsider the court’s ruling that struck expert testimony because the expert used the discounted cash flow method to determine the value of a business that went out of business. Upon reconsideration, the court decided that such method was allowable in this case and, therefore, the testimony should be reinstated and presented to the jury for use in determining damages.
Forecasting Expenses for an Economic Damages and Lost Profits Analysis
Several experts at the two-day BVR National Economic Damages Virtual Conference discussed projections in a damages and lost profits context. This article focuses on projecting expenses.
Insights from the inaugural National Economic Damages Virtual Conference
Attorneys and financial experts joined forces for the first-ever National Economic Damages Virtual Conference to discuss intellectual property damages, COVID-19 damages, forensic evidence, and the ins and outs of appearing in court.
Today! Inaugural National Economic Damages Virtual Conference
Attorneys and financial experts join forces for the first-ever National Economic Damages Virtual Conference, a two-day event that starts today, May 26.
Leading damages guide spawns two-day virtual conference May 26-27
Compelling topics direct from the pages of BVR’s Guide to Economic Damages will come to life during the first National Economic Damages Virtual Conference on May 26-27.
Court disses restaurant’s ‘direct physical loss’ theories in COVID-19 suit
The key question in many COVID-19-related insurance disputes is what constitutes “direct physical loss,” a federal court recently explained as it rejected a plaintiff’s breach of contract claim against the insurer.
Professional Standards for Certified Public Accountants, Economists, and Other Financial Experts
Financial experts may be subject to standards of professional practice from a number of sources when they measure lost profits damages and give related expert testimony. The sources can include governmental regulators as well as professional membership organizations and societies. In addition, a technical community may establish professional standards of practice in other ways.