- Expert testimony regarding damages is often challenged on the basis that the expert has failed to properly consider causation. In some cases, the courts have ruled that the expert is allowed to assume causation and does not have to do further work to evaluate the causal linkage. In others, the courts have ruled that expert opinions should be excluded for failing to consider causation.
- In many commercial damage cases, there is a need to create the “but for” world – essentially a model that analyzes the financial implications of what would have happened “but for” an alleged bad act. In situations where the expert analyzes the “but for” world, they will invariably need to assess and apply assumptions.
- In commercial damages cases, we as experts find ourselves relying on information provided by our clients that many times incorporates management’s own assumptions and assertions. This information can include items such as financial projections, business plans and growth plans.
- In the damages world, we as experts routinely talk about a plaintiff’s “duty to mitigate,” but the concept of mitigation is not something that we see all damage experts consider when preparing a damage calculation on behalf of a plaintiff.
- Geisinger Health System chooses Baker Tilly to perform their community health needs assessment
- Previous Next