The B A team provides fully-supported analyses of financial losses / economic damages in a variety of lawsuits. We have computed economic losses in hundreds of cases. In some matters, we review the reasonableness of opinions proffered by the opposing economist, the validity of his / her underlying assumptions, the appropriateness of methods, the accuracy of calculations. Whether an attorney engages us on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant, we are advocates of neither, but rather, objective contributors of information that will help the trier of fact understand the economic losses at issue. We compute economic losses based on generally accepted methodologies and factually appropriate economic data, then deliver our opinions in clearly written, carefully prepared reports or in testimony that stand up to the scrutiny of opposing experts and in cross-examination.
The following examples serve as a representative sample of our work. Contact us to receive Dr. Boisso's C.V., which shows additional examples.
Personal Injury Cases
Asked to determine the lost earning capacity of a child in a catastrophic brain injury case, Dr. Boisso applied an ordered probit regression model to estimate the probability the child might have achieved each of eight levels of education. The resulting probabilities, coupled with age-earnings profiles for each level of education and taking into account age-specific probabilities of being employed allowed for a weighted average estimate of the child's lost earning capacity.
Dr. Boisso testified for the defendant in a $20,000,000 lawsuit involving lost earnings of an opthalmologist. By simplifying advanced statistical and economic concepts into easily understood terms, and then illustrating incorrect application of the same by the plaintiff's expert, the jury concluded that the plaintiff's loss was not $20,000,000, but only $3,500,000.
Dr. Boisso applied Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis to examine multiple potential career paths and earnings of a prominent surgeon / university professor whose employment offer at a more prestigious hospital and university was thwarted due to tortious interference by a competitor.
A soldier, returning from service in Iraq, was denied re-employment at her prior job, in contradiction to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. Financial losses were determined by estimating her active duty (disability) military wages, various military subsidies, but-for wages as mechanical engineer in prior employment, lost military and employer-company pension benefits, Veterans Administration compensation, and post-retirement medical care.
B A has analyzed economic losses in several cases involving injured or wrongfully terminated railroad workers, incorporating information particular to union agreements, applying work-life expectancy statistics specific to railway workers, modeling anticipated progression of promotions and wages, and determining lost Tier 1 and Tier 2 retirement benefits.
Plaintiff alleged defendant committed tortious interference with employment relationships, essentially "stealing" plaintiff's employees, and, as a consequence, causing lost profits. Using plaintiff's expert's own data sources as well as various industry, government, and market data, B A showed that every assumption used by plaintiff's expert to estimate lost profits was without foundation, and in some cases, exactly contradicted by the data.
Plaintiff alleged defendant lured away a key employee, who took numerous, highly profitable customer accounts to his new employer. B A applied "survival analysis" to estimate the month-to-month probabilities the "taken" customers might have continued using plaintiff's services, and proved the "taken" customers exhibited higher survival probabilities than those not taken. To estimate plaintiff's lost profits, survival probabilities were coupled with average revenues earned from each customer account.
Plaintiff owned and operated a carbon reduction / recycling facility that extracted natural gas from decaying matter in a landfill, generating carbon emission credits sellable on the open market. Relying on a greenhouse gas expert's projection of future tradable credits, B A computed the present discounted value of the credits by developing the plaintiff-company's estimated cost of equity, taking into account various, pertinent components of risk.
By making clear his method, assumptions, and calculations in simplified terms, Dr. Boisso explained to the jury that plaintiff-company's lost profits in a breach of contract lawsuit equaled $15,000,000, not $30,000 as argued by the defendant's economist. The losses were calculated by forecasting unrealized revenues from sales in North America as well as several countries in Europe and subtracting estimated incremental costs. The jury awarded $15,000,000.
When a car crashed through the front window of a high-end clothing store preparing for its grand opening, defense counsel requested assistance interpreting plaintiff's expert's projected loss analysis of this unestablished business. B A prepared questions for the deposition of plaintiff's expert, focusing on assumptions regarding loss of inventory, variable and fixed costs, avoided costs, and reliability of loss figures vis-à-vis a reasonable degree of economic probability.
In a misappropriation of trade secrets case, B A prepared multiple empirical and statistical counterarguments to plaintiff's expert's regression analysis of predatory pricing, showing that several alternative explanations, each based on data specific to the plaintiff's and defendant's respective companies, could explain the defendant's price changes. By ignoring these alternative explanations, plaintiff's expert could not assert the defendant engaged in predatory behavior.
B A developed a complex compensation payment model for a multi-level network marketing company that reliably mimicked the actual, but undisclosed, payment mechanism of defendant-company. Arbitrators adopted our model to calculate client-plaintiff's financial loss of $10,000,000 in a breach of contract lawsuit.
Dr. Boisso directed and supervised a team of analysts in an investigation of antitrust allegations against 15 Gulf of Mexico oil-drilling companies in a $5 billion lawsuit. Working for the insurers of defendant oil-drilling companies, his findings proved integral in pre-trial settlement for "pennies on the dollar."
Other Economic Matters
Appearing before multiple city councils as well as a state regulatory agency, Dr. Boisso explained the benefits of rescinding price regulation of tow truck companies. He showed that greater competition would result in a more stable market with optimal utilization of inputs and competitive pressures on prices. Clients report sustained profitability after multiple years of breaking even under regulation.