KW Economics prepares rebuttal analysis for fraud and embezzlement cases venued in New Hampshire: what the loss claim consists of, the records that drive it, and a present value built to New Hampshire damages rules and venues. Plaintiff and defense.
An opposing loss quantification in a fraud matter is tested on whether each amount was confirmed against bank statements and third-party documents or taken from the internal books, whether estimated periods are separated from documented ones, whether the tracing follows the funds step by step or assumes a destination, and whether consequential losses are linked to the diversion or include losses that other causes produced. The economist checks the transaction schedules against the records, recalculates the loss by scheme and period under corrected inputs, and states what the records support and what they do not.
Critique of an opposing economic damages, valuation, or forensic accounting report for plaintiff or defense counsel. The review tests the assumptions, data sources, discount rates, worklife and life expectancy inputs, growth rates, mitigation treatment, and arithmetic behind the opposing number, identifies the errors that matter, and quantifies how the conclusion changes when they are corrected. The result supports cross-examination, a rebuttal report, or a motion directed at the reliability of the opinion.
The direct loss is usually the amount traced through the records, and its size depends on how long the scheme ran and how far back the records permit reconstruction. Consequential losses can exceed the direct loss when the diversion starved a business of working capital or caused a default. Where the funds were used to acquire assets, tracing to those assets can support recovery from the assets themselves, which changes the practical exposure. The analysis states the amounts by year and by method so that partial findings and limitations are visible.
New Hampshire courts screen expert testimony for reliability under a statutory standard: the judge asks whether the economist is qualified, whether the opinion rests on sufficient facts and reliable principles and methods, and whether those methods were reliably applied to the case. A damages report is written to that inquiry, with every rate and table traced to a published source.
Highest court: New Hampshire Supreme Court. Court system: courts.state.nh.us.
Federal venues: District of New Hampshire.
New Hampshire reduces a negligence-based award by the plaintiff's share of fault and bars recovery once that share exceeds the combined fault of the defendants. Interest on the award runs from the filing of the writ in civil actions generally, so the interval between filing and judgment is part of the economic picture. Economic damages are not subject to a general statutory limit, and the report separates past from future amounts so the interest computation can follow.
We issue a rebuttal report where one is disclosed and provide deposition and trial testimony, cross-examination outlines, and support for motions directed at the opinion.
An opposing loss quantification in a fraud matter is tested on whether each amount was confirmed against bank statements and third-party documents or taken from the internal books, whether estimated periods are separated from documented ones, whether the tracing follows the funds step by step or assumes a destination, and whether consequential losses are linked to the diversion or include losses that other causes produced. The economist checks the transaction schedules against the records, recalculates the loss by scheme and period under corrected inputs, and states what the records support and what they do not.
New Hampshire courts screen expert testimony for reliability under a statutory standard: the judge asks whether the economist is qualified, whether the opinion rests on sufficient facts and reliable principles and methods, and whether those methods were reliably applied to the case. A damages report is written to that inquiry, with every rate and table traced to a published source. Fraud and Embezzlement cases venued in New Hampshire are heard in the Superior Court (General jurisdiction; civil cases with jury trials, felonies), with final appeals to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. Matters within federal jurisdiction proceed in the District of New Hampshire.
New Hampshire reduces a negligence-based award by the plaintiff's share of fault and bars recovery once that share exceeds the combined fault of the defendants. Interest on the award runs from the filing of the writ in civil actions generally, so the interval between filing and judgment is part of the economic picture. Economic damages are not subject to a general statutory limit, and the report separates past from future amounts so the interest computation can follow. The report presents past and future amounts separately, states every rate and table with its source, and shows the result under the alternatives the other side is likely to argue, so counsel can apply the New Hampshire rules to a documented figure.
Request a consultation on Rebuttal or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.