• Case Law - QuickRead Top Story

    Legal Update: Randall v. Widen: Admissibility of Rebuttal Witness Testimony

    May 27, 2026

    Randall v. Widen is a federal court case filed in the Western District of Wisconsin, that involves a redemption. The article focuses on the pre-trial motions involving the admissibility of the experts. In the case, Plaintiff alleged that Defendants failed to disclose material information in connection with the redemption of closely held shares. Arthur C. Clarke once said, “For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert.” Randall v. Widen, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142800, 2025 WL 2081193 (W.D. Wis. July 24, 2025) demonstrates that Mr. Clarke knew what he was talking about. As often happens in litigation Background[1]…

  • Financial Forensics - QuickRead Top Story

    Discerning the Differences Between Audits and Forensic Investigations (Part I of II)

    May 27, 2026

    This is the first of two articles comparing the roles of the auditor and the forensic accountant, specifically their differing objectives, responsibilities, professional standards, and engagement terms. This article, which focuses on fraud investigations conducted by forensic accountants, also discusses how each professional approaches risk assessment, the concept of materiality, and building teams. Gathering information and reporting will be examined in the second article. Introduction There is a popular misconception that audits of financial statements are conducted with the primary objective of detecting fraud. Since the collapse of Enron, independent external financial statement auditors have made great strides in communicating…

  • Artificial Intelligence - QuickRead Top Story - Valuation/Appraisal

    Leveraging AI in Business Valuations: Practical Applications, Ethical Boundaries, and Defensible Practice

    May 20, 2026

    The central question is not whether AI can be used in valuation work because it clearly can. Rather, the key question is how it should be used in a way that improves quality without compromising professional judgment, ethical obligations, or defensibility. The author shares his thoughts on the later question. Artificial intelligence (AI) is quickly becoming part of the day-to-day workflow in business valuation. What began as a novelty for drafting and summarizing has matured into a practical tool that can assist valuation professionals with research, data organization, financial analysis, visual presentation, and administrative efficiency. The central question is not…

  • Litigation Consulting - QuickRead Top Story

    When Credentials Aren’t Enough: Lessons from the Exclusion of a Highly Qualified Damages Expert

    May 20, 2026

    A well-seasoned and highly educated CPA walked into federal court to present a lost profits analysis. He walked out of the courthouse completely excluded from testifying. This article recounts why he was excluded and lists a number of lessons one can glean from the case because having one or more credentials will not save one from exclusion. A CPA with more than 25 years of experience walked into federal court to present a lost profits analysis. He held the ABV, ASA, and CFP designations. In addition, he held a master’s degree in taxation and had decades of experience at major…

  • Litigation Consulting - QuickRead Top Story

    Discounting Losses to Present Value in Personal Injury Cases: Three Methods to Discount Lost Income

    May 13, 2026

    Having a good working knowledge of the different methods available for calculating the present value of future lost income in personal injury and wrongful death cases gives an expert an opportunity to demonstrate his or her expertise in the forensic economic field. This article will visit three methods and expand on their similarities and differences. The U.S. Supreme Court, various Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal, and numerous state Supreme Courts have provided decisions highlighting three different methods available for calculating the present value of future lost income in personal injury and wrongful death cases. These methods are discounting using the…

  • Litigation Consulting - QuickRead Top Story

    When Loss of Earning Capacity Survives Daubert: Lessons for Forensic Economists

    May 13, 2026

    A recent 5th Circuit Court ruling reaffirms that earning capacity and lost wages are distinct concepts, and that an economist’s experience-based methodology can satisfy reliability standards even without a post-injury earnings comparison. The author discusses the case. A recent 5th Circuit Court ruling reaffirms that earning capacity and lost wages are distinct concepts, and that an economist’s experience-based methodology can satisfy reliability standards even without a post-injury earnings comparison. Forensic economists who calculate damages in personal-injury matters routinely confront a recurring defense playbook: attack the expert’s assumptions, demand a side-by-side comparison of pre- and post-injury earnings, and argue that anything…

  • Artificial Intelligence

    The AI Investigator: Comparing Leading LLMs for Social Media Asset Discovery

    May 13, 2026

    This article explores how modern LLMs can assist financial forensic professionals with social media asset discovery and investigative intelligence gathering. Using a consistent set of research prompts and investigative scenarios, the article compares the performance of Microsoft Copilot, ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude across areas such as accuracy, source transparency, investigative depth, contextual reasoning, and usability. Readers will gain insight into the strengths and weaknesses of each platform, where AI can accelerate investigative workflows, and the limitations practitioners should understand before relying on AI-generated intelligence in forensic engagements. If only I had learned about financial forensics earlier in my life, I…

  • Unimpeachable Neutrality vs. Hardboiled Myths: A Direct Response to Hardball with Hitchner Issue 65/66
    Litigation Consulting - QuickRead Top Story - Valuation/Appraisal

    Unimpeachable Neutrality vs. Hardboiled Myths: A Direct Response to Hardball with Hitchner Issue 65/66

    May 7, 2026

    James Hitchner’s March/April 2026 issue of Hardball with Hitchner, which opens with what it calls Myth 39, devoted a substantial part to criticizing my article “Unimpeachable Substance and Principles: Business Valuation Standards and the Substance and Principles of USPAP,” published in NACVA QuickRead on March 12, 2026. I appreciate the attention. Criticism from a visible platform is an opportunity, and I intend to use it fully. James Hitchner’s March/April 2026 issue of Hardball with Hitchner, which opens with what it calls Myth 39, devoted a substantial part to criticizing my article “Unimpeachable Substance and Principles: Business Valuation Standards and the…

  • AI, Work Product, and Rule 26 in Three Cases: Beware of Your AI Queries; They May Not Be Protected
    Artificial Intelligence - Financial Forensics - Litigation Consulting - QuickRead Top Story

    AI, Work Product, and Rule 26 In Three Cases: Beware of Your AI Queries; They May Not Be Protected

    May 7, 2026

    When you are a party in a legal matter, sometimes the things you type into an LLM are protected and sometimes they are not. Sometimes, if you share privileged things with your AI-companion, those things are no longer privileged. It depends on what you shared, who you are, and why you shared it. In this article, the author discusses three recent cases that discuss what is discoverable. Three recent cases have addressed the use of large language models (LLM or colloquially referred to as “AI”) in litigation: Warner v. Gilbarco, United States v. Heppner, and Morgan v. V2X.[1] The first…