Skip to Content

Blog

Monthly Archives: October 2020

We have distilled decades of experience at the intersection of law, business and finance into a suite of articles to help our clients make sense of business valuation, forensic accounting, and litigation support. Please visit our site regularly for our latest content.

  The news cycle is currently inundated by the testimony of medical professionals of various backgrounds and experience, and as we have seen, their opinions and advice can starkly differ. While many have advocated for social distancing and the use of masks, others have sought to cast doubt on the productivity of these measures, claiming either that they are unnecessary or that they have no impact on the virusโ€™s transmissibility. Recently, lawyers for the CT Freedom Alliance offered two medical expert witnesses that were subsequently rejected on the basis that neither was sufficiently qualified to serve as an expert. In response to one individualโ€™s previous attestations that viruses are nonexistent and vaccines poisonous, Judge Thomas G. Moukawsher expressed his clear inclination that established scientific evidence should not be disputed. This is an extreme example but one that bears mentioning. Judges are frequently confronted with radically opposing partisan expert opinions. Irrespective of their familiarity with the subject at hand, they must decide as to which opinion is most correct. With regards to COVID-19 and the preventative measures thereof, there are a sufficient number of credible and widely circulated opinions as to make the credibility (or lack thereof) of witnesses such as those described above relatively obvious. But what of matters that concern subjects that arenโ€™t so broadly known? Let us take for example the industry accepted principles and standards in business valuation. In a matrimonial, shareholder, or estate dispute, it is often that both parties hire a business valuation expert. Occasionally, […]