A Review of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Pfeifer Decision For those interested in working in the personal damages area, a review of the U.S. Supreme Courts’ Pfeifer decision is essential. It provides a great outline as to what the courts expect from an expert’s work. This article reviews the Pfeifer decision and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ Culver II decision, which expands on the definitions for discounting methods approved by the U.S. Supreme Court. The field of litigation support provides a wide range of options for accounting and financial experts to work. Opportunities abound for work in the…
-
-
What is an Injured Party Worth? The Forensic and Valuation Services division of the AICPA and CIMA issued a Practice Aid in 2020 on Measuring Damages Involving Individuals. This Practice Aid supersedes AICPA Forensic and Valuation Services Practice Aid 98-2, Calculation of Damages from Personal Injury, Wrongful Death, and Employment Discrimination. This NACVA QuickRead article provides a summary of the updated Practice Aid. Introduction The Forensic and Valuation Services division of the AICPA and CIMA issued a Practice Aid in 2020 on Measuring Damages Involving Individuals. This Practice Aid supersedes AICPA Forensic and Valuation Services Practice Aid 98-2, Calculation of…
-
Show Your Workings! Many engagements to determine or rebut a lost wages claim include many elements established by the expert. This article focuses on the tax aspects of an award, specifically, how should the plaintiff receive a tax component award and, if so, how should this award be calculated. Many engagements to determine or rebut a lost wages claim (in an alleged wrongful termination, improper denial of promotion, wrongful death, or other such litigated dispute involving individuals) have the following elements established by the expert: Establishing the chronology of events; An assumption of the defendant’s liability; Analyzing lost earnings and/or…
-
When Calculating the Exemplary Damages Cap In a recent Texas Court of Appeals case, the jury awarded plaintiff $15,000,000 in exemplary damages; the Court reduced this amount citing section 41.008(b)(1) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, which caps exemplary damages at two times the amount of “economic damages,” plus up to $750,000 in non-economic damages. The question on appeal was whether the jury’s finding of “pecuniary loss” was the same as “economic damages” for purposes of Chapter 41. The Court emphasized the word “actual” in the statutory definition of “economic damages”. The decision features a dissent from Justice…