Expand the following panels for additional search options.

San Bernardino Cty. Trans. Auth. v. Byun

In eminent domain case, appeals court says trial court’s exclusion of defendants’ valuation expert was justified where expert simply adopted another expert’s valuation without testing the raw financial data and being able to substantiate the other expert’s assumptions and conclusions.

‘Wholesale’ Adoption of Another’s Valuation Makes Expert Testimony Worthless

In eminent domain case, appeals court says trial court’s exclusion of defendants’ valuation expert was justified where expert simply adopted another expert’s valuation without testing the raw financial data and being able to substantiate the other expert’s assumptions and conclusions.

ESOP case alive (for now), but court limits damages testimony under Daubert

In a developing ESOP case, the government recently suffered a setback when the court agreed with the trustee that portions of the damages testimony the government’s expert proposed failed to hold up under the Daubert reliability prong.

DOL sues over ESOP; trustee launches Daubert attack

In a developing ESOP case, the court recently excluded a chunk of the government expert’s damages testimony and dismissed one of the counts for lack of damages evidence.

Trustee Succeeds in Curtailing DOL Expert Testimony Under Daubert

In ESOP dispute, court partially excludes DOL expert’s damages analysis under Daubert; court finds expert’s market comparable approach to support overpayment claim is unreliable as is expert’s methodology for calculating alleged loss in stock value to existing shareholders.

Acosta v. Vinoskey

In ESOP dispute, court partially excludes DOL expert’s damages analysis under Daubert; court finds expert’s market comparable approach to support overpayment claim is unreliable as is expert’s methodology for calculating alleged loss in stock value to existing shareholders.

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.

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.

Expert’s FMV Analysis Aligns With Applicable Healthcare Law

In healthcare case centering on Anti-Kickback Statute, court finds government expert’s FMV analysis of physician services, which excludes value and volume of referrals, accords with standard applying to AKS cases and is admissible under Daubert.

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.”

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.”

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.

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.

Management forecasts receive close scrutiny from courts

In assessing the soundness of valuations, courts in a variety of cases have been paying close attention to the management projections appraisers have used or decided not to use in performing their value analyses. If courts are scrutinizing projections for reliability and plausibility, experts hoping to prevail in the litigation context must do so as well.

Expert’s Damages Opinion Specific Enough for Class Certification Stage

In a securities case, court applies Daubert analysis to plaintiff expert’s market efficiency opinion and event study; expert is qualified even without academic background, and his damages opinion is sufficiently specific to facts of the case and reliable.

SEC’s Daubert Challenge to Securities Valuation Testimony Fizzles

In an SEC case requiring valuation of restricted securities, court admits most of the testimony of parties’ experts; experts need not be specialists in given field and need not demonstrate familiarity with USPAP or SSVS to qualify under Daubert, court fin ...

Expert’s FMV Analysis Aligns With Applicable Healthcare Law

In healthcare case centering on Anti-Kickback Statute, court finds government expert’s FMV analysis of physician services, which excludes value and volume of referrals, accords with standard applying to AKS cases and is admissible under Daubert.

United States ex rel. Lutz v. Berkeley Heartlab, Inc.

In healthcare case centering on Anti-Kickback Statute, court finds government expert’s FMV analysis of physician services, which excludes value and volume of referrals, accords with standard applying to AKS cases and is admissible under Daubert.

Majority Says EBITDA Valuations Buttress Damages Award

In business tort case involving unprofitable entity trying to market a trade secret, court upholds damages award; experts’ EBITDA valuations were based on commonly used method and numerous data sources, and experts linked data to conclusions, court says.

Pike v. Tex. EMC Mgmt., LLC

In business tort case involving unprofitable entity trying to market a trade secret, court upholds damages award; experts’ EBITDA valuations were based on commonly used method and numerous data sources, and experts linked data to conclusions, court says.

No ‘Circular Reasoning’ in Expert’s Lost Profits Calculation

Appeals court upholds lost profits award, finding expert’s damages model was admissible under Daubert; market survey was only one of “competing principles or methods” to gather facts on sales, and failure to use it does not make opinion per se unreliable.

Defendant’s Move to Exclude Damages Expert at Class Certification Stage Fails

Court performs Daubert inquiry at class certification stage, finding plaintiffs’ expert testimony is admissible; expert has shown it is possible to calculate damages by applying common, reliable formula to entire class, court says, certifying class.

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.

SEC’s Daubert Challenge to Securities Valuation Testimony Fizzles

In an SEC case requiring valuation of restricted securities, court admits most of the testimony of parties’ experts; experts need not be specialists in given field and need not demonstrate familiarity with USPAP or SSVS to qualify under Daubert, court fin ...

SEC v. Nutmeg Group, LLC

In an SEC case requiring valuation of restricted securities, court admits most of the testimony of parties’ experts; experts need not be specialists in given field and need not demonstrate familiarity with USPAP or SSVS to qualify under Daubert, court fin ...

76 - 100 of 186 results