Why Hire a Financial Expert Witness?

In most personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits, an expert witness is be needed to determine the actual financial impact of the case. Significant financial losses, including lost wages and potential future lost earnings, are key considerations in a lawsuit, which may become especially costly when a business owner can no longer run his or her business as the result of incapacity or death. Determining and demonstrating the economic impact of a serious personal injury or wrongful death to a judge or jury is pivotal to winning a case

Whether from cases involving workplace injuries, automobile accidents, medical malpractice or other situations, personal injury or wrongful death lawsuits often involve material demands for damages. When retained by plaintiff, the economic damages expert must make sure claimed damages are not grossly overestimated or based on improper assumptions. When retained by defendant, the economic damages expert must be prepared to highlight such errors in plaintiff’s claims. In all cases, the financial expert witness must thoroughly review the documents available and make reasonable calculations based on this information.

An expert witness testimony can provide a competitive edge in court by providing unbiased, factual analysis and testimony for economic damage estimations. Additionally, a financial expert witness is better able to identify inaccurate calculations or inappropriate assumptions made by the opposing damages witness.

Los Angeles Expert Witness

Thomas Neches has decades of experience providing expert witness testimony for defendants and plaintiffs in personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits. We understand the weight and implications of these types of lawsuits and apply appropriate measures to determine the most accurate and realistic calculations.

Our expert analysis of damages prevents the other side from understating or overstating damages. Contact us to learn how we can strengthen your argument with realistic and convincing calculations and testimony.

Learn more about our representative engagements and trial testimony involving personal injury or wrongful death cases below.

Representative Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Engagements

Side Case Number Case Name Attorney Law Firm Testify
Def 65 82 78 Trinkfass v. Elliott, et al. Richard A. Jones Parker, Stanbury, Babcock, Combs & Trial
Def SC 048292 Elliette Ellis v. Carmenita LSG Express Delivery, et al. Kenneth M. Von Helmolt Agajanian, Mcfall, Weiss & Tetreault Depo / Trial
Def SCV 23593 Floyd D. Hansen, et al. v. McLane Company, Inc., et al. Damon C. Anastasia Seyfarth, Shaw, Fairweather & Geraldson Trial
Pln SACV00-739 GLT (EEx) Dwayne McKinney v. County of Orange, et al. Brian A. Sun O’Neill, Lysaght & Sun Depo
Def TCO1330 Rogelio Tadeo v. All-Safe Destruction, Inc., et al. Douglas L. Day Berger, Kahn, Shafton, Moss, Figler, Simon & Gladstone Depo
Pln EC029976 Anaid Ambaryan v. Macy’s West, et al. Ara Aroustamian Law Offices Of Chanessian And Aroustamian Depo
Def 97727 Thomas Carter v. KFC National Management Company Jeffrey H. Dasteel Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Trial
Def BC254672 Bong Rae Kim v. Honda Motor Company, Ltd.., et al. Alex W. Craigie Feeney Kellet Wienner & Bush Depo
Def SC 107891 Gina Mammana v. Greenrose, Inc. dba Conroy Flower’s, et al. Robert A. Latham III ArcherNorris Trial
Pln EC052660 Sergie Aftandelian, et al. v. Luciano Gomez, M.D. Luan K. Phan LKP Global Law Depo / Trial
Pln PC050410 Valorie Lenz Margalit, et al. v. Evershine Granites PVT. LTD, et al. Robert A. Latham III ArcherNorris Depo


Key Sample Representative Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Engagement

Gina Mammana v. Greenrose, Inc. dba Conroy Flower’s, et al. (Robert A. Latham III – ArcherNorris). Mr. Neches testified as an expert in California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, on behalf of defendants in this personal injury matter. Ms. Mammana, a waitress, was injured when her automobile was struck by a Conroy’s Flower’s delivery truck. Plaintiff’s expert testified Ms. Mammana’s historical and future lost earnings ranged from $544,000 to $617,000. Mr. Neches testified regarding his analysis of plaintiff’s calculations and regarding his calculation of plaintiff’s potential lost earnings, which ranged from $8,000 to $105,000.   Result:   the jury award plaintiff lost earnings based on Mr. Neches’ calculations.