|
|
| Are the Experts Even Working on the Same Case?—How to Reconcile Significant Differing Expert Opinions |
Course CPE: 1 hour
Field(s) of Study: Accounting
Program Level: Intermediate
Prerequisites: Learning activity level that builds on a basic program most appropriate for individuals with detailed knowledge in the area
Delivery Method: Self-Study
Advanced Preparation: None |
Item
Number: 19FL0606RDEO
Shipping Weight: 0lbs. 0oz. |
| Price:
$99.00 |
|
|
|
|
Recording Date: June 6, 2019
Program Description
When damages are at stake, the plaintiff and defendant often hire damage experts to help the trier of fact determine the appropriate amount to award to the injured party if liability is established. Each expert is supposed to provide an objective analysis of the case and opine with reasonable certainty to the damages that were incurred. So why does it often seem that the two experts arrive at damage opinions that look like they belong in two different cases? Why is the plaintiff’s expert’s opinion of damages almost always higher than the defendant’s expert’s opinion of damages? This session will use real case examples to explore the reasons why divergent opinions can occur.
Learning Objectives
After completing this webinar, attendees will be able to:
- Identify common reasons that expert’s opinions can be so different
- Develop strategies for addressing these differences in their report or in deposition
Who Should Attend
CPAs, valuators, practitioners, etc.—anyone interested in developing and advancing their skills for this topic.
Presenter(s):
Mallory Ashbrook
Rebekah Smith |
|
|
