While at trial the plaintiff’s attorney during cross examination focused upon the spreadsheet used by the defense’s economic expert to allegedly prove that there were zero economic damages. The expert had relied heavily upon research assistants to construct the spreadsheet, but under the expert’s supervision. Unfortunately, the expert had not carefully examined the calculations and was not aware of several calculation errors.

There are times in which the economic expert is either unprepared or led into difficult positions where the unforeseen occurs. Likewise, there are times in which the cross examination opens the door for further damaging economic testimony. Over the years, we have learned some very valuable lessons, albeit at the expense of the opposition.

The plaintiff’s expert was considered to be a negotiations expert. He was formally trained in the law, but had no economic training. In a patent infringement suit, he “invented” a bargaining scenario which put the opposing side in an unrealistic and compromised position. His “invented” situation created extravagant damage amounts which were unable to be substantiated with any economic principles. After a finding of infringement, the jury awarded these damages to the plaintiff.