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.
Court Declares Lost Profits Analysis ‘Goes Too Far’
Court says nontraditional lost profits theory goes “too far” as it assumes sales occurred pursuant to a license the parties negotiated but never actually executed and assumes revenue derived not only from patents-in-suit, but also related unpatented softw ...
Court Draws Line Between Data Quality and Data Quantity
In personal injury case involving sole owner of LLC, court leans on 7th Circuit Manpower decision in deciding which parts of expert’s loss analysis to admit; it dismisses defendants’ objections concerned with data quality rather than data quantity.
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.
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.
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.
Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp.
Court says nontraditional lost profits theory goes “too far” as it assumes sales occurred pursuant to a license the parties negotiated but never actually executed and assumes revenue derived not only from patents-in-suit, but also related unpatented softw ...
Chambers v. Fike
In personal injury case involving sole owner of LLC, court leans on 7th Circuit Manpower decision in deciding which parts of expert’s loss analysis to admit; it dismisses defendants’ objections concerned with data quality rather than data quantity.
What Rationale for Net Book Value in Damages Analysis?
Appeals court finds trial court did not err when it incorporated net book value calculation in its lost profits analysis in a case claiming breach of fiduciary duty and usurpation of business opportunity; dissent says damages calculation is “illogical.”
Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Dolgencorp, LLC
Appeals court affirms Daubert exclusion of plaintiff's damages expert because she analyzed the wrong problem and her conclusion did not assist the trier of fact; also, her economic model and regression analysis failed to measure “effect of the violation.”
Expert’s Tax Appraisal Weathers Frontal Daubert Attack
Appeals court says tax tribunal did not abdicate its gatekeeper role under Rule 702 when admitting taxpayer expert’s appraisal, where the expert was qualified and used a reliable methodology; a searching inquiry into the underlying data was not necessary.
Lane v. Lampkin (I)
Appeals court finds trial court did not err when it incorporated net book value calculation in its lost profits analysis in a case claiming breach of fiduciary duty and usurpation of business opportunity; dissent says damages calculation is “illogical.”
B & L Development LLC v. City of Norton Shores
Appeals court says tax tribunal did not abdicate its gatekeeper role under Rule 702 when admitting taxpayer expert’s appraisal, where the expert was qualified and used a reliable methodology; a searching inquiry into the underlying data was not necessary.
Court Finds ‘Market Value Concept’ Requires Flexibility
Court says under Daubert a business valuator is qualified to value an investment company dealing in real estate since the company is not a piece of real estate but a business with diverse assets and finds real estate valuation is by nature “imprecise.”
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”
Myservice Force v. Am. Home Shield
In breach of contract suit, court strikes expert’s revenue forecasts, using Monte Carlo simulation, finding key assumption resulted from expert’s misreading of contract; court also strikes second expert’s valuation resting on inadmissible forecasts.
Expert Trips Over Fundamental Damage Concepts
Court strikes rebuttal testimony under Daubert, where expert admitted he lacked an understanding of the damages concepts central to the opposing expert’s calculation, failed to identify a specific method for his conclusions, and included his clients’ tria ...