Showing results 1-10 of 30.

  City of Tuscaloosa v. Harcros Chemicals, Inc. - 11th Circuit

Decided: 10/23/1998
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded, Affirmed

The Court then held that Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993), did not alter this long-standing rule in the specific context of expert testimony, and in fact did not address the standard of appellate review of such rulings at all. ... Garner offered data and testimony regarding costs borne and profits garnered by the defendants in the Alabama chlorine market, and also verified the data included in a database prepared by another of the plaintiffs' experts, statistician James McClave. McClave offered data showing, and testimony regarding the statistical significance of, market shares in the Alabama chlorine market, incumbency rates (i.e., the frequency with which companies retained chlorine contracts with particular municipalities from year to year), the frequency of tie bids in the market, prices bid by the defendants, winning bid prices, and costs borne by the defendants.

Cited 261 times
Anti-competitive behaviour Market structure and pricing Commercial crimes Business terms Sales 

  In re Scrap Metal Antitrust Litigation - 6th Circuit

Decided: 5/15/2008
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Clay v. Ford Motor Co., 215 F.3d 663, 667 (6th Cir.2000) (stating that a district court is not required to conduct a Daubert evidentiary hearing to qualify an expert witness). ... ("In Daubert the Court charged trial judges with the responsibility of acting as gatekeepers to exclude unreliable expert testimony, and the Court in Kumho clarified that this gatekeeper function applies to all expert testimony, not just testimony based in science.").

Cited 168 times
Pricing Anti-competitive behaviour Commercial crimes Economics terminology Markets (customer bases) 

  Major League Baseball Properties v. Salvino, Inc. - 2nd Circuit

Decided: 9/12/2008
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

MLBP, in support of its motion for summary judgment, presented the April 11, 2003 report of its expert economist, Professor Franklin M. Fisher ("Fisher Report"), analyzing MLBP's functions and the product market within which MLBP operates, and disputing the views of Guth. Fisher opined, inter alia, that MLBP is not a cartel and should instead be viewed as a joint venture; that the relevant product market consists at the very least of licenses for all sports and entertainment intellectual property, rather than just for MLB Intellectual Property; and that the centralization of MLB Intellectual Property licensing and other functions in MLBP produces procompetitive efficiencies. ... Salvino, in opposition to MLBP's summary judgment motion, submitted a rebuttal report and declaration by Guth in response to the Fisher Report (see Expert Rebuttal Report of Louis A. Guth dated May 8, 2003 ("Guth Rebuttal Report"); Declaration of Louis A. Guth dated September 22, 2003 ("Guth Decl.")), reiterating views set out in the initial Guth Report (see, e.g., Guth Decl. ¶¶ 2, 6).

Cited 64 times
Commercial crimes Business terms Consumer theory Economics terminology Anti-competitive behaviour 

  Concord Boat Corp. v. Brunswick Corp. - 8th Circuit

Decided: 3/24/2000
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded

Even a theory that might meet certain Daubert factors, such as peer review and publication, testing, known or potential error rate, and general acceptance,[11] should not be admitted if it does not apply to the specific facts of the case. ... A court must focus on the "reasonableness of using such an approach, along with [the expert's] particular method of analyzing the data thereby obtained, to draw a conclusion regarding the particular matter to which the expert testimony was directly relevant."

Cited 56 times
Anti-competitive behaviour Monopoly (economics) Commercial crimes Graphics file formats Marketing 

  Conwood Co., LP v. US Tobacco Co. - 6th Circuit

Decided: 5/15/2002
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

In Daubert, the Supreme Court "established a general gatekeeping [or screening] obligation for trial courts" to exclude from trial expert testimony that is unreliable and irrelevant. ... Pursuant to Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, "[i]f scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise...."

Cited 47 times
Commercial crimes Business terms Anti-competitive behaviour Monopoly (economics) Judicial remedies 

  Petruzzi's IGA Supermarkets v. Darling-Delaware Co. - 3rd Circuit

Decided: 7/13/1993
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Reversed/Remanded

Although the two experts based their hypothesis on the other evidence proffered by the plaintiff, they tested this hypothesis with multiple regression analysis using the pricing data that the defendants turned over to Petruzzi's IGA. From this study, they concluded that new accounts were paid roughly 39% more for raw materials than were existing accounts. ... There are three intertwined bases for excluding testimony under Rule 702: (1) if the testimony will not assist the trier of fact; (2) if scientific evidence is not sufficiently reliable; and (3) if the particular expert does not have sufficient specialized knowledge to assist the jurors.

Cited 40 times
Anti-competitive behaviour Animal fat products Marketing Economics terminology Microeconomics 

  Zf Meritor, LLC v. Eaton Corp. - 3rd Circuit

Decided: 9/28/2012
District Court Decision: Excluded
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Plaintiffs' suggestion that the reasonableness of an expert's reliance on facts or data to form his opinion is somehow an inappropriate inquiry under Rule 702 results from an unduly myopic interpretation of Rule 702 and ignores the mandate of Daubert that the district court must act as a gatekeeper. ... Federal Rule of Evidence 702, as amended in 2000 to incorporate the standards set forth in Daubert, imposes an obligation upon a district court to ensure that expert testimony is not only relevant, but reliable.

Cited 28 times
Monopoly (economics) Marketing Anti-competitive behaviour Economics terminology Business terms 

  US ex rel. Miller v. Bill Harbert Intern. Const. - Dist. of Columbia Circuit

Decided: 6/22/2010
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Citing Daubert's observations about how to determine whether expert testimony is reliable — from whether a theory has been subjected to peer review, to its potential rate of error, to whether a theory is generally accepted in the relevant field — the court determined that McAfee's testimony was reliable. ... As Daubert explained, Rule 403 exclusion based on unfair prejudice is particularly important in the case of expert evidence, which "can be both powerful and quite misleading because of the difficulty in evaluating it."

Cited 22 times
Auctioneering Commercial crimes Financial markets Business terms Sewerage infrastructure 

  In re High Fructose Corn Syrup Antitrust Lit. - 7th Circuit

Decided: 6/18/2002
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

Turning to the technical statistical evidence (not the data themselves, which for the most part are uncontested, but the inferences drawn from them by the use of statistical methodology), we recommend that the district judge use the power that Rule 706 of the Federal Rules of Evidence expressly confers upon him to appoint his own expert witness, rather than leave himself and the jury completely at the mercy of the parties' warring experts. ... The plaintiffs rebutted with still another expert, who pointed out correctly that adding variables that are correlated with the variable of interest can make the effect of the latter disappear — to which the defendants reply, also correctly, that there are statistical methods for solving this problem (the problem of multicollinearity, as it is called by statisticians).

Cited 18 times
Sugar substitutes Costs Commercial crimes Production economics Regression analysis 

  Behrend v. Comcast Corp. - 3rd Circuit

Decided: 8/23/2011
District Court Decision: Admitted
Appellate Court Decision: Affirmed

216*216 Our precedent explains that Rule 702 and Daubert impose three requirements for admission of expert testimony: the expert must be qualified, the expert's methodology must be reliable, and the expert's proffered testimony must fit the particular case. ... IIA Phillip E. Areeda et al., Antitrust Law ¶ 398b (3d ed.2007) (describing that at the class certification stage the plaintiffs' expert typically concludes that "any significant economic issues underlying the class representative's antitrust claims, including but not limited to issues regarding market definition... will be analyzed and proven through the use of common data and evidence that would be used to prove the claims of the other members of the proposed Class") (emphasis added).

Cited 15 times
Monopoly (economics) Logic Business models Business terms United States antitrust law