Live Webcast on Commercial Damages: Overview and Cross Examination - Bullet Proof or Bullet Holes?

Sept. 16, 2010 - PRLog -- Commercial damages is like a three legged stool: the plaintiff has to prove liability, damages and collectability. If one leg is not there, the stool falls over. The reality of a plaintiff’s situation centers on the task of proving to a reasonable certainty all three legs of the stool within the confines of the rules of evidence. This can be very difficult. Damage calculations are generally fitted to one of several methods:

A. Before and after methodology (often by comparing the injured party’s activities before the wrongful event with its performance after the event).
B. Yardstick methodology (typically using other firms or the plaintiff’s other locations as a benchmark to estimate what would have happened to the plaintiff but-for the wrongful event).
C. Sales projection methodology (building a financial model of what would have happened to the affected business based on various model inputs).
D. Market model methodology (often by linking plaintiff’s losses to its market share of the overall industry sales it experienced before the event).

Many factors go into an expert’s consideration for the reasonable measurement of damages. Such factors are defined by the facts and circumstance of the alleged event as defined by the Plaintiff’s complaint. Some of the considerations by the expert might include:

- Determination of change in revenues perhaps based on historical trends
- Incremental costs avoided by the loss in revenues
- Reasonable profits expected but not realized
- Economic outlook affecting calculation
- Industry outlook affecting calculation
- Actual performance realized during the period damaged thus providing a mitigation to the profits claimed lost
- The length of time horizon of the period damaged
- Adjustments for risk and cost of capital (discount rates)
- Fixed and variable costs of production
- The impact of competition
- Capacity constraints on the business
- Available technology and its effect on damage
- Regulatory and environmental issues

The measurement of damages from a defendant’s infringement on intellectual property falls into three main categories:
1. Lost profits to the plaintiff
2. Reasonable royalties imposed on the defendant
3. Disgorgement of the defendant’s profits realized

The event would present three examples of claims for cross examination and discussion:
1. A statistical trend line
2. A contractual infringement and
3. A trade secret royalty

The Knowledge Group has assembled a team of experts to help unravel the complexities and understand reasonable measurements in commercial damages and how they will impact your firm. Click the “Register” button below to sign up today. Advanced registration is recommended as space is limited. Significant discounts apply for early registration.

Speakers/Faculty Panel

Michael J. Mard, CPA/ABV, ASA, President, The Financial Valuation Group

Michael A. Crain, CPA/ABV, ASA, CFA, CFE, Principal, The Financial Valuation Group

William Hamilton, Partner, Quarles & Brady LLP

Neil J. Beaton, CPA/ABV/CFF, CFA, ASA, National Partner in Charge, Valuation Services, Grant Thornton LLP

For a peek at the event, please visit:  
http://www.knowledgecongress.org/event_2010_Commercial.html

About The Knowledge Group, LLC/The Knowledge Congress Live Webcast Series

The Knowledge Congress is a series of live webcasts produced by The Knowledge Group, LLC, which examine trends, regulatory, and technology changes across a variety of industries. “We bring together the world's leading authorities and industry participants through informative two-hour webcast that study the impact of changing regulations and help businesses succeed through proper regulatory compliance.” To contact or to register to an event, please visit: www.knowledgecongress.org.