Galasso v. Cobleskill Stone Products
New York appellate division upholds the trial court’s order to disclose a valuation report, finding the appraisal was relevant to the litigation and done for estate tax purposes and therefore was not “of a legal character”; the attorney-client privilege does not apply, court says.
Court Explains Why Valuation Report Is Discoverable
New York appellate division upholds the trial court’s order to disclose a valuation report, finding the appraisal was relevant to the litigation and done for estate tax purposes and therefore was not “of a legal character”; the attorney-client privilege does not apply, court says.
Noven Pharmaceuticals v Novartis Pharmaceuticals
In breach of contract action, court finds defendant’s valuation report is discoverable; report is relevant to an issue in dispute and not protected by attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine where valuation was not done solely in anticipation of litigation but had mixed purpose.
Court Finds Defendant’s Valuation Had ‘Mixed Purpose’ and Orders Disclosure
In breach of contract action, court finds defendant’s valuation report is discoverable; report is relevant to an issue in dispute and not protected by attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine where valuation was not done solely in anticipation of litigation but had mixed purpose.
Lack of Facts and Data Render Expert’s Fair Value Balance Sheet Not Helpful
Bankruptcy Court excludes as unreliable and irrelevant expert’s solvency opinion and balance sheet; court says expert lacked the facts and data necessary to enact his chosen method and “failed in numerous ways” to reliably apply the facts and data in accordance with the selected method.
Weinman v. Crowley (In re Blair)
Bankruptcy Court excludes as unreliable and irrelevant expert’s solvency opinion and balance sheet; court says expert lacked the facts and data necessary to enact his chosen method and “failed in numerous ways” to reliably apply the facts and data in accordance with the selected method.
Expert Qualified to Offer Unit Valuation of Telecom Property
In tax assessment case, court finds valuation expert qualified under Rule 702 despite lacking an appraiser’s license; court says rule specifically contemplates expert opinion on property valuation by nonappraisers if witness is qualified by “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.”
Radiologix, Inc. v. Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, LLC
Court admits expert calculation that determines one set of damages for two related plaintiff entities and that relies on data from nonparty parent entity; court finds calculation need not precisely track corporate structure to meet Daubert requirements.
Under Daubert, Damages Calculation Need Not Replicate Corporate Structure
Court admits expert calculation that determines one set of damages for two related plaintiff entities and that relies on data from nonparty parent entity; court finds calculation need not precisely track corporate structure to meet Daubert requirements.
Combined Expert Testimony May Provide Valid Damages Framework
In Daubert case, court finds government’s combined expert testimony concerning financial impact of negative publicity on sponsor (USPS) of Lance Armstrong and his cycling team provides “sufficiently non-speculative framework for determining damages.”
United States ex rel. Landis v. Tailwind Sports Corp.
In Daubert case, court finds government’s combined expert testimony concerning financial impact of negative publicity on sponsor (USPS) of Lance Armstrong and his cycling team provides “sufficiently non-speculative framework for determining damages.”
Blind Reliance on Client Data and Wide-Ranging Values Gut New Venture Valuation
In a securities fraud action, appeals court upholds class certification; trial court did not err when it found direct evidence of price impact by way of event study was not necessary to show market efficiency where there was strong indirect evidence.
Lightbox Ventures, LLC v. 3 RD Home Ltd.
Court excludes lost profits calculation and valuations of new venture; experts’ unquestioning adoption of plaintiff’s data and assumptions, the large range of valuations proffered, and disclaimers accompanying valuations undermine opinions’ meaningfulness.