KW Economics prepares intellectual property damages analysis for partnership and shareholder dispute cases venued in Montana: what the loss claim consists of, the records that drive it, and a present value built to Montana damages rules and venues. Plaintiff and defense.
In an owner dispute the intellectual property question is usually who took what: a departing partner, member, or shareholder who used the company's trade secrets, customer information, or technology in a competing venture, or a controlling owner who moved the company's patents, marks, or software into an entity the owner holds separately. The economist measures the company's actual loss from the diverted sales and customers, the competing venture's profits attributable to the information, and, where those are hard to isolate, a reasonable royalty for the use, net of any overlap, and coordinates the measure with any valuation of an owner's interest, so the same lost earnings are not counted both as damages and as a reduction in the value of the interest.
Economic analysis and expert testimony on damages in patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret cases and in license and royalty disputes, for the patentee or the accused infringer and for either side of every other claim. The work measures each remedy the governing statute allows: a reasonable royalty and the patentee's lost profits, including price erosion, apportioned to the patented feature; the defendant's profits, the owner's actual damages, and corrective advertising in a trademark case; actual damages and the infringer's profits in a copyright case, where the infringer carries the burden of its deductible expenses and of the profit owed to other factors; and actual loss, unjust enrichment, or a reasonable royalty for a misappropriated trade secret.
The valuation date and the standard of value control the result: a fair value standard may exclude the minority and marketability discounts that a fair market value standard applies, and the gap between the two can be substantial for a minority interest in a closely held company. Normalizing adjustments to owner compensation and related-party dealings often decide whether the business shows earnings to value at all. Where the claim includes diverted profits, the amount depends on how far back the records permit reconstruction and on whether the business's actual results can be separated from market conditions.
Montana courts apply a reliability inquiry to novel scientific evidence and otherwise ask whether the economist is qualified by training and experience and whether the opinion will help the fact finder, leaving the weight of the testimony to cross-examination. An economic damages report is therefore examined on its inputs: whether each rate, table, and assumption traces to the record and to a published source.
Highest court: Montana Supreme Court. Court system: courts.mt.gov.
Federal venues: District of Montana.
Montana 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. Prejudgment interest is generally limited to sums that were certain when the loss occurred, which favors a liquidated contract balance over a projected loss. Economic damages are not subject to a general statutory limit outside specific statutory claims, and the report identifies the components that were certain when they accrued and states the projected components as of a fixed date.
We issue the final report on the disclosure schedule and provide deposition and trial testimony, critique of the opposing damages analysis, and updated calculations as the court construes any patent claims and the record develops.
In an owner dispute the intellectual property question is usually who took what: a departing partner, member, or shareholder who used the company's trade secrets, customer information, or technology in a competing venture, or a controlling owner who moved the company's patents, marks, or software into an entity the owner holds separately. The economist measures the company's actual loss from the diverted sales and customers, the competing venture's profits attributable to the information, and, where those are hard to isolate, a reasonable royalty for the use, net of any overlap, and coordinates the measure with any valuation of an owner's interest, so the same lost earnings are not counted both as damages and as a reduction in the value of the interest.
Montana courts apply a reliability inquiry to novel scientific evidence and otherwise ask whether the economist is qualified by training and experience and whether the opinion will help the fact finder, leaving the weight of the testimony to cross-examination. An economic damages report is therefore examined on its inputs: whether each rate, table, and assumption traces to the record and to a published source. Partnership and Shareholder Dispute cases venued in Montana are heard in the District Court (General jurisdiction; one district in each of 56 counties), with final appeals to the Montana Supreme Court. Matters within federal jurisdiction proceed in the District of Montana.
Montana 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. Prejudgment interest is generally limited to sums that were certain when the loss occurred, which favors a liquidated contract balance over a projected loss. Economic damages are not subject to a general statutory limit outside specific statutory claims, and the report identifies the components that were certain when they accrued and states the projected components as of a fixed date. 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 Montana rules to a documented figure.
Request a consultation on IP Damages or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.