George Roach Litigation Consulting
Your Subtitle text
Home Page

George P. Roach
6820 Meadow Lake Circle
Dallas, Texas  75214

214 228 0484

                                               Litigation Consulting                      

                         In corporate litigation, there are three roles for a litigation consultant.  As a testifying expert, a litigation consultant can opine as (1) an expert on the business substance of the case or (2) an expert on the damages process by which the remedy is measured.  In smaller cases, many consultants assume both roles.  In other cases, sometimes larger or just more complex, there can be a third role which is for the litigation consultant to assist the attorneys of record in developing the optimum damages strategy and in assembling a team of testifying experts to explain and quantify the claims.  It’s not unusual to involve such a non-testifying expert even before the complaint is filed.

                        Most of my experience as a testifying expert has drawn on my credentials and experience as a financial analyst.  Much of my business experience as an investment banker for a major bracket firm was based on the financial analysis of privately held and publicly held companies for possible mergers, securities offerings and financial re-organization.  My financial training and expertise favor the process of measuring remedies rather than the detailed operation of a single business or industry although I have consulted on cases in many different industries.

                        I also provide a multi-disciplined perspective.  I received an MBA in 1975 but later returned to school and received a JD in 1993.  Since 1993, I have applied my legal education to my financial analysis to offer clients a blend of the two perspectives.  Licensed to practice in Texas, I am increasingly retained to work inside a case to assist the attorneys of record in developing and implementing their remedies strategy. Sometimes this role also involves assisting in the deposition of opposing experts.

                        Corporate litigation does not always require or benefit from a broad remedies perspective.  However, there are cases in which the multiple and overlapping potential causes of action require a broad knowledge of the continuum of damages and remedial alternatives and how a plaintiff’s or defendant’s remedies strategy can impact the expected monetary outcome as well as the intermediate requirements for discovery and motion practice.

                         Two major examples include the alternative measure of the plaintiff’s loss in value and the relatively unknown uses of unjust enrichment.  Lost-profits is a well known measure of damages but it can often be less than the plaintiff’s loss in value if only because most jurisdictions expect lost-profits to be measured over a shorter period of time than business value.  Unjust enrichment is both an independent cause of action and an increasingly prominent remedy in corporate litigation.  The remedy of unjust enrichment has always been the primary remedy for cases relating to violations of intangible assets and will therefore become increasingly important as the U.S. economy continues to emphasize intellectual property over smoke-stack operations.  Unjust enrichment is also the remedy of choice against corporate defendants for federal agencies like the SEC, CFTC, FTC and FDA.

                        The value of my multi-disciplined approach was confirmed in my experience as director of consulting for an ‘inside’ consulting group at a litigation boutique in Dallas that specializes in complex litigation.  In less than four years, the monthly billings of my group increased seven-fold as the litigators and clients learned to appreciate the unique perspective that litigation consultants can provide corporate litigation.  Since I left that group, more than 15 of my articles have been published that reflect the strategic dimension of damages and remedies for corporate and complex litigation.  (See Publications page shown above for links to all articles.)

                        Call me and let’s explore how litigation consulting might be able to increase the expected value of the remedies or reduce the cost of your litigation.  To encourage clients to explore the possible remedies issues in their cases, I don’t charge for the first meeting on a case. Alternatively, I sometimes sponsor one hour CLE courses that I present to groups of ten or more lawyers at their firm’s offices.  Topics for those courses include ex post vs. ex ante damage issues; unjust enrichment as a remedy for corporate claims; measuring monetary damages for fraudulent inducement and the strategic advantages of rescission as a remedy.



Website Builder