The plaintiffs’ business was allegedly damaged by the actions of the defendant. The plaintiffs engaged an expert in economic damages and lost profits. The defendants engaged their own expert to provide his opinions as to why he believed the plaintiffs’ expert’s opinions were unreliable. The court ultimately excluded this portion of the defendants’ expert’s testimony.
View Case Digest View CaseBaldwin v. Bader (I)
Critical errors, shaky methodology, are key to expert's undo in valuing corporate guaranties.
Baldwin v. Bader (II)
U.S. Court in Maine excludes expert testimony because, despite his extensive experience and effort, he did not have specific experience valuing personal guarantees.
Expert Makes Critical Errors in Valuing Corporate Guaranties
Critical errors and shaky methodology are key to expert's undo in valuing corporate guaranties.
Court Makes ‘Close Call’ on Complex Valuation of Insider Corporate Guaranties
U.S. Court in Maine excludes expert testimony because, despite his extensive experience and effort, he did not have specific experience valuing personal guarantees.
Valuing Director Guaranties in Bankruptcy: Using a Put Option Approach
Bankruptcy court confirms reorganization plan based in large part on “put option” approach to valuing corporate insider guaranties.