JBrick, LLC v. Chazak Kinder, Inc.
The defendants challenged the testimony of the plaintiff’s damages expert, and the plaintiff challenged the testimony of the defendants’ damages rebuttal expert. The case involved a Lego interpretation model of the Second Beit Hamikdash, or Second Holy Temple, and an alleged infringement of the copyright on this model. The court struck the plaintiff’s expert’s damages of a product related to the Temple Product but allowed testimony of damages on the Temple Product. The court also struck the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony that the plaintiff should be awarded lost profits on the Temple Product plus a disgorgement of the defendants’ profits. Both may not be awarded. The court also struck portions of the defendants’ rebuttal testimony and report.
Daubert Challenges on Experts on Damages Partially Successful
The defendants challenged the testimony of the plaintiff’s damages expert, and the plaintiff challenged the testimony of the defendants’ damages rebuttal expert. The case involved a Lego interpretation model of the Second Beit Hamikdash, or Second Holy Temple, and an alleged infringement of the copyright on this model. The court struck the plaintiff’s expert’s damages of a product related to the Temple Product but allowed testimony of damages on the Temple Product. The court also struck the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony that the plaintiff should be awarded lost profits on the Temple Product plus a disgorgement of the defendants’ profits. Both may not be awarded. The court also struck portions of the defendants’ rebuttal testimony and report.
Another case of lopsided valuation experts
A Minnesota divorce case is an example of why judges can get the perception that valuation experts are hired guns.
Tennebaum v. Deshpande
In this Minnesota appeal of a marital dissolution decree, the district court received valuations from experts representing both parties and determined the value of the husband’s business interest in an asset management company. The husband appealed that value. The district court had considered matters of methodology as well as personal goodwill. The court of appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion and affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Valuation of Husband’s Business Interest Considers Credibility, Personal Goodwill, and Other Issues
In this Minnesota appeal of a marital dissolution decree, the district court received valuations from experts representing both parties and determined the value of the husband’s business interest in an asset management company. The husband appealed that value. The district court had considered matters of methodology as well as personal goodwill. The court of appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion and affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Attorney gets Daubert challenge over ESOP employment agreements
In a federal court in Georgia, an employee benefits lawyer prepared a report and was deposed regarding the process by which employment agreements were negotiated as part of a transaction involving an ESOP.
Gamache v. Hogue
In a motion related to a lawsuit asserting ERISA violations under the ESOP plan for the defendants, including the Administrative Committee of Technical Associates of Georgia Inc. ESOP and certain individuals, the defendants moved to exclude the testimony and report of the plaintiffs’ expert, Jeffrey Krenzel. Krenzel was an “employee benefits lawyer” with 21 years’ experience, including eight years as a partner in a firm specializing in ESOP transactions. The court determined that Krenzel was qualified and that his opinions and report were reliable and helpful to the trier of fact.
U.S. District Court in Georgia Allows Testimony of Attorney as to ESOP Transaction Process for Employment Agreements
In a motion related to a lawsuit asserting ERISA violations under the ESOP plan for the defendants, including the Administrative Committee of Technical Associates of Georgia Inc. ESOP and certain individuals, the defendants moved to exclude the testimony and report of the plaintiffs’ expert, Jeffrey Krenzel. Krenzel was an “employee benefits lawyer” with 21 years’ experience, including eight years as a partner in a firm specializing in ESOP transactions. The court determined that Krenzel was qualified and that his opinions and report were reliable and helpful to the trier of fact.
Lamm v. Preston
This was a divorce case with a complex set of issues regarding the marital estate and the businesses of the parties. This Supreme Court of Idaho case and opinion related to one of the businesses, Black Sage Acquisition LLC, in which the couple owned 25%. The magistrate court determined the value of Black Sage Acquisition as $163,373 based on fair market value. The remaining value was determined to be personal goodwill. The Supreme Court (Idaho) affirmed the decision of the district court, which upheld the magistrate court.
Idaho Supreme Court Affirms Magistrate Judge’s Opinion Regarding Personal Goodwill
This was a divorce case with a complex set of issues regarding the marital estate and the businesses of the parties. This Supreme Court of Idaho case and opinion related to one of the businesses, Black Sage Acquisition LLC, in which the couple owned 25%. The magistrate court determined the value of Black Sage Acquisition as $163,373 based on fair market value. The remaining value was determined to be personal goodwill. The Supreme Court (Idaho) affirmed the decision of the district court, which upheld the magistrate court.
U.S. Appellate Court Rules Sufficient Evidence to Support Future Damages
In this partnership dispute, the 11th Circuit U.S. Appellate Court affirmed the district court and ruled that trial testimony of witnesses provided specific evidence that an energy utility company needed technicians the partnership provided before the disassociation and was not likely to change in the future. Damages were deemed “reasonably certain.” The defendants’ argument that, without an equitable accounting, the damages were too speculative, was waived because it was first raised post-verdict.
WL All. LLC v. Precision Testing Grp. Inc.
In this partnership dispute, the 11th Circuit U.S. Appellate Court affirmed the district court and ruled that trial testimony of witnesses provided specific evidence that an energy utility company needed technicians the partnership provided before the disassociation and was not likely to change in the future. Damages were deemed “reasonably certain.” The defendants’ argument that, without an equitable accounting, the damages were too speculative, was waived because it was first raised post-verdict.
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.
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.
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.
Court Admits Unjust Enrichment Damages Based on Profit Projections
In Daubert case centering on misappropriation of trade secrets, court says plaintiff expert’s valuation of trade secrets based on defense projections of sales and profits derived from offending product is admissible; defendant failed to show this approach to determine asset’s value is improper.
Grove US LLC v. Sany America Inc.
In Daubert case centering on misappropriation of trade secrets, court says plaintiff expert’s valuation of trade secrets based on defense projections of sales and profits derived from offending product is admissible; defendant failed to show this approach to determine asset’s value is improper.
Pratt’s Stats/DealStats Market Analysis Survives Appeal by Owner Spouse
Appellate court finds no error in trial court’s adoption of market-based value determination by husband’s expert; expert acknowledged this was not the preferred method to value the small company, but company’s problematic financials and uncooperative attitude “compelled” use of this approach.
Hultz v. Kuhn
Appellate court finds no error in trial court’s adoption of market-based value determination by husband’s expert; expert acknowledged this was not the preferred method to value the small company, but company’s problematic financials and uncooperative attitude “compelled” use of this approach.
Cristofano v. Chahal
In fair value dispute, court credits defense expert analysis based on capitalized economic income method and working with company’s historical earnings and growth rates; analysis properly accounts for particular facts of the case, including expiration of lucrative client contract.
Court Favors Fair Value Analysis Based on Historical Data and Case Facts
In fair value dispute, court credits defense expert analysis based on capitalized economic income method and working with company’s historical earnings and growth rates; analysis properly accounts for particular facts of the case, including expiration of lucrative client contract.
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.”