1 / 14

A problem of valuation in a legal context

This article explores the complexities of valuation in a legal context, specifically in cases of personal injury and compensation. It examines the factors involved in assessing damages and the challenges faced by both judges and juries in making these determinations.

phagerman
Download Presentation

A problem of valuation in a legal context

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A problem of valuationin a legal context Law & Valuation Alan Palmiter Spring 2005

  2. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury: You have heard the evidence and have found defendant United Airlines negligent in the death of William Nollenberger, the husband and father of the plaintiffs in this action. You now face the task of assessing compensation in the case. As attorney for the plaintiffs, let me review the damages evidence for you. William Nollenberger (1950-2004)

  3. Based on this evidence, you are to determine the general damages suffered by his family that resulted from the death of William Nollenberger by reason of the negligence of United Airlines. As jury, you may take into account all relevant factors to ensure just and fair compensation to the plaintiffs.

  4. Verdict Instructions If you find defendant United Airlines was negligent in the crash of Flight 049, return a verdict for the plaintiffs. If so, state the amount of general damages to which the plaintiffs are entitled.

  5. Actual “special interrogatories” • What was the life expectancy of William? 2. How long would William have continued to earn if he had not died? How much? • How much would William N. have gotten after retirement from his government pension? • What percentage of William's earnings would have been paid for William's personal expenses? for taxes? • How much were the services of William N. worth to his family? To compute PV of services, what will annual inflation be during William's life expectancy? • In figuring the value today, how much do you discount money in the future? • How much would the family pay in taxes on award?

  6. Nollenberger v. United Air Lines216 F. Supp 734 (SD Calif 1963)vacated 335 F2d 279 (9th Cir 1964) Additional factors decided by jury in the case: • Taxes decrease earnings, family’s award • Personal expenses decrease net earnings • Personal services increase family’s net returns • Retirement (pension) earnings • Discount rates vary – earnings, pension, services

  7. Trial court methodology Earnings (increasing) Net earnings Present value (net earnings) Discount Taxes Personal expenses + Services (increasing) Discount Present value (services) + Pension (flat) Discount Present value (pension) = Judgment Tax adjustment Total PV

  8. Nollenberger v. United Air Lines Is calculation of damages? • Matter of law (for judge) • Matter of fact (for jury) Can legal system perform this task?

  9. Nollenberger v. United Air Lines216 F. Supp 734 (SD Calif 1963)vacated 335 F2d 379 (9th Cir 1964) Jury award: $573,255 • Special interrogatories • General verdict Trial judge: $858,510 • Finds special interrogatories inconsistent with general verdict • Enters judgment using special interrogatories Appeals court: $573,255 • Concludes jury may have considered factors beyond special interrogatories • Vacates judgment, remands for judgment based on general verdict

  10. Contexts for legal valuation • Litigation: personal injury, prejudgment interest, equitable distribution • Business: corporate appraisal, buyouts, bankruptcy, board decision-making, patent infringement • Taxation: minority interests, estate tax, inter-firm transfers • Administrative: value of life, frozen embryos, expropriation, property takings • Criminal law: death penalty, stolen art

  11. “Blind leading the blind” Peter Bruegel (Flemish 1568)

  12. Legitimacy of legal valuationin litigation? • Decision-makers • Judge: trained in interpreting texts, judging human dynamics, focusing on process • Jury: excellent in interpreting evidence, identifying falsehoods, reflecting community values • Lawyers: same training as judges • Experts • Paid by parties: subject to examination by other party • “Battle of experts: rules of evidence allow accepted methodologies of profession

More Related