Case Study 11—Analysis of and Modification to Opposing Experts' Reports
In a commercial damages case that has an expert on the other side, you will inevitably be asked to review that opposing expert's report and describe to counsel the errors in that report, including math mistakes, the use of unreliable and nonrelevant data, the use of improper methods and/or the misapplication of the proper methods, and any assumptions regarding the facts and data in the case that appear to be speculative. In this case study we offer you the opportunity to follow along as we review both the plaintiff's and defendant's experts' reports in a case involving a contract dispute between Vending Corporation of America (VCA) and the State C Department of Transportation (State C or State).
The two parties entered into a seven-year contract on April 10, 2006, for VCA to install and service vending machines at highway rest stops in State C beginning on January 1, 2007. The State became dissatisfied with VCA's service and ultimately canceled the contract effective December 31, 2008, and VCA filed a breach of contract action and sued for the expected lost profits over the full five years remaining on the contract.
The contract called for VCA to install and operate vending machines at 12 rest stops in the first two years of the contract, and then build-out to a maximum of 70 stations over the last five years of the contract. The contract called for VCA to design and erect ...