Accountants Considerations of Daubert-Related Decisions on Valuation Expert Testimony

By Reilly, Robert F. | The National Public Accountant, October 2000 | Go to article overview

Accountants Considerations of Daubert-Related Decisions on Valuation Expert Testimony


Reilly, Robert F., The National Public Accountant


Introduction

Accountants are often called upon to perform litigation support services, including expert testimony on valuation and economic damages. This includes valuation analyses related to shareholder disputes and shareholder appraisal rights; breach of contract and other types of commercial litigation; insurance claims and cases of federal income taxation; federal gift and estate tax; state and local property taxation; infringement and deprivation; eminent domain and condemnation; marital dissolution and family law; and other types of valuation-related disputes.

Accountant/valuation expert witnesses should be aware of several recent court cases that have applied and interpreted the Daubert guidelines with regard to expert testimony. For purposes of this discussion, the Daubert guidelines refer to the factors articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 C. Ed., 2d 469 [1993]). These factors are applied by federal trial courts in their "gatekeeping" function of including--or excluding--expert testimony under the Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 702.

While the Daubert guidelines specifically apply in federal courts to expert testimony offered under Rule 702, accountants should realize that these federal guidelines might influence state and local trial courts as well.

It is the objective of the Daubert "gatekeeping" requirement to ensure the reliability and relevancy of expert testimony. The Daubert factors are used by the trial court to consider whether an expert witness, when basing testimony on professional studies or on personal experience, employs in the courtroom the same level of intellectual rigor that characterizes the practice of an expert in the relevant field. As will be discussed below, the Daubert case originally applied to scientific expert testimony, and the Daubert factors were used to help clarify what is science and what is "junk science."

Several recent published decisions (at both the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court levels) have concluded that the trial court's "gatekeeping" inquiry into both relevance and reliability applies not only to scientific testimony, but also to all expert testimony. Accordingly, all valuation practitioners should be aware of--and should attempt to comply with--these expert testimony guidelines. This would include all accountants who offer expert testimony on the value of assets, properties, and business interests within the context of Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 702.

The Daubert Factors

Under Rule 702, trial judges have historically been the "gatekeepers" regarding the admission of expert evidence in federal cases. Traditionally, trial judges would rarely disqualify expert witnesses or exclude expert testimony. Rather, they would limit the areas in which the expert was allowed to offer testimony. And, they would allow witnesses to testify and then afford that testimony its "due weight" in their final deliberations. However, in Daubert, the Supreme Court articulated specific factors that trial judges should consider with regard to the admission or exclusion of expert testimony.

In the Daubert case, a doctor testified before the trial court and presented a radical medical opinion. That opinion was unsupported by either the relevant professional literature, the medical research scientific standards, the recognized professional organizations, or any concurring medical research colleagues. With regard to the admission of this testimony, the questions that trial court faced were: (1) Was the doctor truly a scientific expert or merely a "hired gun?" and (2) Was the expert testimony based on medical expertise or on "junk science?" With regard to the admissibility of expert testimony, the Daubert court wrestled with the following issues:

1. Whether the expert will be testifying as to scientific knowledge.

2. Whether the testimony based on scientific knowledge will assist the trier of fact in determining the ultimate issue. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Accountants Considerations of Daubert-Related Decisions on Valuation Expert Testimony
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.