Moral of the story: Know the plaintiff's business BEFORE you calculate the damages

3d Circuit Upholds Exclusion of Damages Testimony in Franchise Dispute (From Dauberontheweb.com)

By dsteward
URL: 3d Circuit Upholds Exclusion of Damages Testimony in Franchise Dispute

In this case, the court disliked the plaintiff's case and their economic damage evidence.

One major criticism of the plaintiff's expert was that the expert failed to adequately familiarize himself with the company.

The court wrote:

In calculating damages, the district court rejected as speculative the report of Plaintiffs’ expert and observed in passing that the report was inadequate under thestandard prescribed in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 593 (U.S.1993).

Because Plaintiffs’ damages theory depends upon what would have happened if the Modis transaction had been consummated, their expert faced the task of addressing how Modis’s involvement would have affected Titan’s financial performance. Plaintiffs’ expert, however, had no pre-existing knowledge of Modis and failed to familiarize himself with the company.