Study: Expert Witnesses Put Litigation at Risk with Wrong Benchmarks to Calculate Damages

Study: Expert Witnesses Put Litigation at Risk with Wrong Benchmarks to Calculate Damages

Marks Paneth & Shron reports that expert witnesses who rely on assumptions that overlook business reality often cause their testimony to be excluded on a Daubert challenge.

Donald M. May, Ph.D., current director in the Litigation and Corporate Financial Advisory Group at Marks Paneth & Shron LLP, has published a commentary in the Marks Paneth & Shron Library examining the critical mistake expert witnesses often make .  In the commentary, Dr. May discusses:

• Why benchmarking shouldn’t be a “one size fits all” approach
• The risks of relying on ex-ante benchmarks to set damages in cases
  involving lost profits and lost enterprise value
• The impact of poorly conceived benchmarks in Celebrity Cruises v.
  Essef
• The ways to improve success rates by adding a consulting expert to the
  litigation team

Read  the full text of Dr. May’s commentary, “Benchmarking: A Challenging Task for Expert Witnesses,” in the Marks Paneth & Shron Library.

In Expert Witnessing, Assumptions about How to Calculate Damages are Critical