Corso Enterprises, et al. v. Shop at Home Network, Inc., Summit Television, Inc. et al. Federal case involved a commercial dispute between developer, manufacturer, distributor of skin care and beauty products and a large television network that marketed and sold these products via special TV shows. Damages estimated included lost profits due to reduction (then cessation) of show times, extra storage costs as product supply line backed up, and prejudgment interest. Retained by George E. Copple, Jr. and Suzette Peyton, counsel for Plaintiff, Nashville, Tennessee.

Fredrick Benson vs. Rhino Industries, et al. Case involved contract dispute between developer/inventor and manufacturer /distributor of aftermarket accessory for pickup trucks. Economic damages estimated as difference in royalty payments between projected vs. actual accessory sales. Retained by Stephen J. Thomas, counsel for Plaintiff, Napa, California.

K.L.Paterson & Associates, Inc. vs. Cathy Kingery and Kingery Communications, Inc. Case involved assessing economic damages arising from breach of contract. Ms. Kingery provided marketing and training services for large Silicon Valley company at request of Paterson. Dispute arose as to whether or not Kingery owed Paterson for any and all work for target company and if so how much. Retained by Alan Seher, counsel for Defendant, Weiss & Weissman, San Francisco.

James Kinnicutt, et al. vs. Biker’s Dream, Inc. Case involved a franchise dispute and damages arising from lost profits and impaired credit worthiness. Analysis provided “but-for” past income history and extra loan payments due to adverse credit rating. Testimony provided in deposition and jury trial credited with enabling favorable settlement for client. Retained by Steven L. Davis, counsel for Plaintiff, Sacramento, California.

George Karanian vs. Precision Craft, et al. Business disruption case in which an explosion and fire destroyed a building with offices used by the dentist/owner for his dental practice and other offices leased to tenants as commercial space. Analysis involved estimation of lost asset value, lost rental income, lost net income from disrupted and relocated dental practice, and expenditures to restore dental and medical history for 5000 patients. Retained by George Royster and Michael Gustafson, counsel for Plaintiff, Halloran & Sage, Hartford, Connecticut.

Aurigemma, et al. vs. ARCO Petroleum Products. Case involved franchise terminations and loss of goodwill by 17 Connecticut gasoline dealers following ARCO decision to cease retail operations east of the Mississippi. For each location we conducted a “but-for” analysis of business value before and after the ARCO franchise and contrasted this value with that under the subsequent Shell lease agreement. Case settled for $600,000 vs. the $35m initially requested. Retained by Robert Keepnews and William Fish, counsel for Defendant, Tyler Cooper & Alcorn, Hartford, Connecticut.

New Education Development Systems, et al. vs. Last Resorts, Inc. AKA Aetna Springs Resort, Inc. JAMS Arbitration Case. Evaluated expected economic value to two different uses of a large land parcel: (1) a vineyard with 9-hole golf course or (2) an 18-hole golf course resort with hotel, spa, vineyard, and housing development. Retained by Paul M. Goorjian, counsel for Plaintiff, Goorjian & McCabe, San Francisco.

ICICI INFOTECH, INC. v. Four Seasons Software, LLC. American Arbitration Association case. Analysis consisted of assessing the business value of a new business that planned to sell an enterprise software application to small and medium sized retail companies. A key element in their ability to successfully launch their product was delivery of the underlying, Windows-based software by software development company from India. Disputes arose about ownership of intellectual property, due dates, costs, and specifications with the result the market opportunity was missed and Four Seasons ceased operations. Retained by Michael McCormick, counsel for Defendant, Tyler Cooper & Alcorn, Hartford, Connecticut.

Gateway Apartment Partners, LP v. DEVCON, et al. A complex case involving damages to a large apartment complex arising from water intrusion and related problems. Analysis consisted of estimating rental revenue loss due to concessions and above-normal vacancies and costs of temporarily relocating tenants, many with low-incomes, while reconstruction was to take place. In addition, provided critique of plaintiff’s damages claims in terms of scope, assumptions and methods. Retained by John Riddle, counsel for Defendants, LaMore, Brazier, Riddle & Giampaoli, San Jose, California.

City of Pinole and Redevelop Agency of the City of Pinole v. Community Housing Assistance Partners, et al. A complex case involving construction defects to a 90 bed assisted living facility, one-third of whom suffered from dementia. Damages arose from repairs and reconstruction and associated operational changes as extensive repairs would be made. Relocation of tenants and office operations were key issues. Retained by Terence J. O’Hara, counsel for Defendants, Bustamante, O’Hara & Gagliasso, San Jose, California.

Daniel Silverie III, Inc. v. Armor Co. A case involving construction defects to a 282 unit apartment complex in Oakland, California. Damages included rent loss due to vacancies and concessions, interest on construction loan, inability to increase rent rates during disruption, above-expected marketing and turnover costs, and additional professional expenses. Retained by Lena Louis, counsel for Plaintiff, Manly, McGuire & Stewart, Newport Beach, California.

Claudine Woolf vs. Mary Kay, Inc., et al. Case involved economic damages that arose from constructive discharge of a salesperson for defendant based on her medical condition. Ms. Woolf was a successful saleswoman for Mary Kay when she learned she both pregnant and had breast cancer. After her sales fell due to time off for surgery and cancer treatments, she lost her position with defendant, but delivered her child. Retained by Angela Alioto, counsel for Plaintiff, San Francisco, California. Trial in Dallas, Texas Superior Court.

LAC Basketball Club, Inc. vs. Bill C. Fitch. Case involved a breach of written contract and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing by NBA coach who failed to seek alternative employment after being fired by Los Angeles Clippers. Analysis consisted of estimating economic loss to LAC had defendant in fact secured job in keeping with past experience as leading NBA and college basketball coach. Retained by Robert H. Platt, counsel for Plaintiff, Manatt, Phelps, & Phillips, LLP, Los Angeles, California.

Chak Sang Wong a/k/a Sam Wong et al. v. Josephine L. Ford a/k/a Josephine Lau et al. A complex Federal case between two individuals who had both a personal and professional relationship involving commercial real estate and a contractor business prior to separating. Damages assessed include lost household production value and rent during time plaintiff lived with defendant, unpaid compensation and un-reimbursed expenses for defendant during time she worked for plaintiff, and foregone income of defendant arising from charges against her and associated impacts on job finding, skill decay, and wage reduction. Retained by Joseph B. Fiorenzo, counsel for Defendant, Sokol, Behot & Fiorenzo, Hackensack, New Jersey.

Golden Apple vs. Ultimate Products Corp., et al. Case involved trade secret infringement and unlawful enrichment through use of customer list by infringer. Analysis of damages for the plaintiff involved estimation of defendant's profit, plus additional damages arising from plaintiff's business development costs and prejudgment interest. Retained by Donald E. Cope, counsel for Plaintiff, Fisher & Phillips, LLP, Redwood City, California.
Wireless Access, Inc. vs. Research in Motion Limited. Case involved patent infringement claim against Canadian manufacturer of popular pagers and cell phones. Analysis included using Georgia-Pacific factors to derive a reasonable royalty rate for use in measuring economic damages due infringed company. Services included estimation of damages, deposition testimony, and critique of defense economic expert’s report. Retained by Tarek Fahmi, counsel for Plaintiff, Blakely, Sokoloff, Taylor & Zafman, Sunnyvale, California.

A highly-confidential case involved misappropriation of trade secrets by employees of a large high-tech company who took confidential information to a second company, a customer, who hired the employees. Damages assessed included wages and options paid the employees during the time the misappropriations occurred, plus so-called “head start” savings to the second firm, and reasonable royalty payments expected for use of the confidential information. Retained by Lita Verrier, counsel for Plaintiff, Ropers, Majeski, Kohn & Bentley, San Jose, California.

Glenda Martinez vs. Hartford Hospital. Plaintiff was a 21-year-old mother of four who claimed “wrongful birth” of twins after sterilization by tubal ligation. Analysis involved projecting costs of child rearing from birth to age 18. Retained by Kimball Hunt, counsel for Plaintiff, Hunt Leibert Chester & Pontacoloni of Hartford, Connecticut.

Hileman vs. Kaiser, et al. Case involved failure to diagnose malignant melanoma on timely basis. Damages included lost stock options, future wages, fringe benefits, and medical costs. Retained by Linda Fermoyle Rice, counsel for Plaintiff, Rice and Bloomfield, Woodland Hills, California.

Margaret Petersen vs. Norman Moscow. After a 1982 spinal cord injury, plaintiff was diagnosed with a C7 ASIA Class B quadriplegia. In June 2004 she underwent a barium extravasation during a barium enema which increased her need for medical care and further limited her ability to live independently. Analysis of this complex case consisted of projecting the future costs of 23 different types of care that were in the life care plans developed by a physician and a rehabilitation counselor. These included medical services, medicines, laboratory and diagnostic studies, medical supplies, medical equipment and attendant care. Future costs for 10 and 15 years life expectancies were discounted to present value as of trial date using appropriate discount rates. Additional damages were computed as the cost of paying management fees to a company to lease apartments that were previously managed by plaintiff. Retained by Charles H. Horn, counsel for Plaintiff, Wright Robinson Osthimer & Tatum, San Francisco, California.

Patrick Petit vs. Diamond California Cab Co. A complex case that involved a personal injury and lost earnings by plaintiff as an employee and reduced business value of a start-up corporation owned by the plaintiff. Retained by Charles Osthimer, III and Sheila Shah Lichtblau, attorneys for Defendant, Wright Robinson Osthimer & Tatum, San Francisco, California.

Robert Moody vs. Parkside Glen Apartments, et.al. Case involved a serious disease called Aspergillosis, caused by mold. Plaintiff was exposed to mold in apartment where he was living and developed Aspergillus in blood. Subsequent disability led to inability to work. Economic damages estimated as lost past and future earnings and future medical care costs. Retained by Gerald Emanuel, counsel for Plaintiff, Hinkle, Jachimowicz, Pointer & Mayron, San Jose, California.

Gill vs. Burlington Northern Santa Fe, et al. Case involved damages arising from an accident in which a train hit a truck at a railroad crossing. The truck driver was killed and two railroad employees injured. Analysis involved assessing loss to Gill family due to death of Mr. Gill and lost wages and future pension benefits of the railroad workers. Retained by Christopher F. Johnson, counsel for defendant, Maranga Morgenstern Law, San Francisco, California.

Craig Winter vs. Chrysler Motors Corporation. Case against an automobile company by a teenager who suffered major internal and spinal injuries in an auto accident in which his seatbelt pressed sharply into his midsection when the car suddenly stopped. As a result, the young man was rendered a paraplegic with a colostomy. Analysis involved computing net lifetime economic loss with adjustments for the impact of disability on the likelihood of working, expected wage rates if worked, expected worklife and expected life. Future medical costs and loss of enjoyment of life also considered. Retained by Robert Williams and Steven Fisher, counsel for Plaintiff, Fisher & Daley, Suffield, Connecticut.

Richard Farias, et.al., vs. Noble Tractor, Inc. Case involved personal injury and assessment of economic damages consisting of past and future earnings and lost profits from self-employed business. Retained by counsel for Defendant, Peter Hart, Wright Robinson Osthimer & Tatum, San Francisco, California.

Todd Lee and Bessie Lee vs. U-Haul International, Inc., et al. Analysis of lost earnings capacity due to products liability involving carbon monoxide poisoning of dentist and his wife while driving a U-Haul truck. Retained by Daniel P. White, counsel for Plaintiff, Walnut Creek, California.

Daniel Dean vs. Oppenheim Davidson Enterprises, Inc. Case involved assessment of lost earnings, mitigated by anorexia nervosa, arising from wrongful death of Oakland physician. Retained by Donald L. Mabry and Charles Horn, counsel for Defendant, Wright, Robinson, Osthimer & Tatum, San Francisco, California.

Epting vs. Kawasaki, et al. Estimated net lost lifetime income of individual killed in a motorcycle accident. Special attention given how mitigating factors reduced expected lifetime income opined by plaintiff economist. Factors included plaintiff being overweight, a smoker, a convicted felon, a heroin/methadone user, and hepatitis B sufferer. Consideration of these issues and decedent's poor work history and expected medical costs, sharply reduced estimates of net economic damages. Retained by Trudi Hamilton and Steve Jacques, attorneys for Defendant, Carmody & Torrance, Waterbury, Connecticut.

Hailey Lovejoy vs. Harold F. Grooms, M.D., et al. Case involved death of 25 year-old single mother who died due to alleged failure to diagnose and treat gallstones, leaving behind a 6-month old daughter. Analysis involved lost earnings capacity of mother adjusted for self-consumption. Retained by Linda Fermoyle Rice, attorney for Plaintiff, Rice and Bloomfield, Woodland Hill, California.

A contract between a chain store and a supplier of a product sold in those stores led to an extra marital relationship between a male executive of the stores and the female owner of the supplier company. When the latter sought to end the relationship, the executive engaged in a series of contract violations that drove the supplier firm out of business. Litigation Economics provided a business valuation report of the supplier firm including economic trends, industry and competitor issues, and measured business value via a discounted cash flow method with a risk adjusted cost of capital. Retained by Gerald Emanuel, counsel for Plaintiff, Hinkle, Jachimowicz, Pointer & Mayron, San Jose, CA.

A products liability case involved a woman whose arm was injured by an automatic door that opened when she was standing by the door. At the time, Fall 2000, the woman held a senior accounting position in a high-tech firm in San Francisco. Plaintiff claims included lost future wages for permanent and total disability and future medical care, the latter included nearly $1 million for lifetime in-pool physical therapies and home-to-pool taxi rides. Litigation Economics provided counter arguments to lost wage claims by noting that the injured person had only a high school education, no formal training in accounting and worked in a firm that was adversely-impacted by the economic downturn in 2001. Jury verdict was for defense and when polled jury said they found Litigation Economics testimony more credible than opinions of plaintiff damages expert. Retained by Charles Horn, counsel for Defendant, Wright, Robinson, Osthimer & Tatum, San Francisco, CA.

An unusual lost profits case involved a San Francisco M.D., who owned and operated a fertility clinic, and two of his patients. One day the clinic implanted two fertilized embryos belonging to a married couple; the first embryo was correctly implanted in the wife of the couple and the second was wrongly implanted in a single woman who was also a patient at the clinic on the same day. The error was apparently quickly known by the clinic but not told the two women until nearly 18 months later after each had born a child as a result of the fertilizations. The children were fraternal twins. In one decision the courts ruled the couple had visitation rights to the child born by the single woman. In order to make these visits, the couple had to relocate from Crescent City, California to San Jose and the father had to relocate his fishing/crabbing operations. Litigation Economics estimated damages consisting of (1) lost fishing profits, (2) extra costs incurred due to commuting, storage and related extra expenses with the new location, and (3) foregone home production value by the father. Retained by Michael Brooks Carroll, and George Mavris, attorneys for Plaintiff, San Francisco and Crescent City, CA.

When an independent consultant died of cancer, his wife sued the trade association he had joined that sold health insurance linked to membership for fraud and breach of contract regarding ability of the policy to pay for cancer treatments. Litigation Economics experts provided consulting regarding trial tactics and damages, noting fact that decedent had chosen the cheapest insurance policy with the highest co-payment requirement, then sought treatment at the most expensive hospital in Los Angeles. Retained by Dwight Francis, Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP, Dallas, TX.
When a ten year old young man was injured in a car accident, he suffered both permanent cognitive impairments and a disfigured face and head. Based on the education plans and careers of other family members, Litigation Economics estimated foregone lifetime earnings by computing two scenarios (1) earnings as a college graduate vs. high school graduate and (2) earnings as a union electrician vs. unskilled laborer. In each scenario, lower earnings profiles were adjusted for mental disability and appearance based on relevant research. Retained by Ralph W. Boroff, counsel for Plaintiff, Boroff, Jensen, Klein & Smith, Santa Cruz, CA.