This case before a federal court involved perceived conflicts between federal and state laws pertaining to certain transportation activities.
- Reviewed case materials.
- Analyzed opposition’s arguments, underlying assumptions, expert reports and exemplar company raw data.
- Conducted independent analysis of major issues.
- Revealed inconsistencies, double-counting and other errors in opposition reports.
- Re-framed raw data in logical, easy-to-follow manner.
- Refuted opposition’s contention regarding perceived damages.
- Supported attorneys with powerful, fact-based analysis.
- Demonstrated flaws in reports submitted by opposition experts.