The damages number that survives cross‑examination.
Forensic Economic Services is retained by trial counsel to quantify economic damages, rebut opposing experts, and testify — in wildfire and mass disaster litigation, employment and wage‑and‑hour matters, personal injury, and commercial disputes. Conflicts cleared immediately and availability confirmed against your deadline.
Run a conflict check
Party names are what the check runs against. Nothing privileged is requested.
What do you need the expert to do?
Most expert sites organize by service. You think in terms of the job in front of you — so that is how this is organized. Pick the one that matches your file.
Prove damages
You need an affirmative damages calculation, a Rule 26 report, and someone who will hold up at deposition and trial. We build the model from source data and defend every assumption on the record.
Retain an affirmative expert →Rebut their expert
A report just landed and the number is wrong. We reverse‑engineer the opposing model, isolate the defective assumptions, and give you the cross‑examination outline along with the rebuttal report.
Request a rebuttal review →Value the case
Pre‑mediation, pre‑demand, or evaluating whether to take the case at all. We give you a defensible exposure range fast, before you commit to a number you cannot walk back.
Get a preliminary range →Damages analysis, by claim type
Each area below is a discipline with its own accepted methods, its own case law on admissibility, and its own failure modes. Follow the link for the assignments we actually take.
Economic Consulting & Valuation
Business and asset valuation for disputes, transactions and reporting — including cost of capital, ESOP and 409A work, with the discount rate built up rather than assumed.
View practice → 02Intellectual Property Litigation Support
Reasonable royalties, lost profits, price erosion and disgorgement in patent, trade secret and trademark matters — with apportionment done so the royalty base survives challenge.
View practice → 03Securities Litigation Support
Event studies, loss causation and materiality, class-period damages and ERISA plan losses — across debt, equity, derivative and commodity markets.
View practice → 04Personal Injury Litigation Support
Lost earnings and earning capacity, household services, life care plan present value and wrongful death — for single plaintiffs and for large claim inventories.
View practice → 05Commercial Litigation Support
Lost profits, lost business value, price erosion, credit damages and business interruption — built to hold up at mediation and under cross-examination.
View practice → 06Employment Litigation Support
Back pay, front pay, lost benefits, tax gross-up and class-wide wage models — regular-rate analysis and PAGA exposure, built to survive certification.
View practice → 07Forensic Accounting
Tracing, misappropriation, financial misstatement, internal control review and dissolution accounting — led by a CPA with AICPA forensic accounting certification.
View practice → 08Data Science
Econometric analysis, statistical sampling, machine learning and forecasting applied to litigation questions — with the method kept transparent enough to survive challenge.
View practice → 09Impact Analysis
Standardized Regulatory Impact Assessments, economic impact studies and scenario modeling — prepared to the evidentiary standard the reviewing agency applies.
View practice → 10Financial Misconduct
Unsuitable products, excessive fees, and pension and annuitization decisions — sized against what a suitable alternative would have produced. Claimants and professionals wrongly accused.
View practice → 11Construction Damages
Delay and disruption, cost overruns, lost profits and lost bonding capacity, change-order economics and progress-payment review — quantified from the schedule and the job cost record.
View practice → 12Electrical & Utility Damages
Utility-caused fire losses, outage and infrastructure-failure damages, and energy-project disputes — for single claimants and for inventories running to thousands.
View practice →Three things that decide whether an expert helps or hurts your case
Credentials are table stakes — everyone has a Ph.D. and a CV. These are the variables that actually change outcomes.
We do the data engineering ourselves
Class wage cases are won and lost on data engineering. We ingest raw payroll, timekeeping and HRIS exports — ADP, Kronos/UKG, Paycom, Workday — at scale and reconcile them against the payroll register before any modeling begins. The same discipline applies to reconstructing destroyed financial records in fire matters.
Reproducible models your team can run
Every calculation ships with a scenario‑toggle model your team can run. Change the rounding assumption or the class period and see the number move. It makes mediation faster and makes cross‑examination much harder.
Deadlines are triaged, not queued
Tell us the designation or trial date on the first call. Matters inside 21 days go to the front of the queue, the conflict check runs immediately, and the first substantive reply comes from an economist within four business hours. If your deadline is one we cannot meet properly, we say so on day one — while you still have time to find someone who can.
Four business hours
That is our published standard for a first substantive reply from an economist, written by a person. If your designation deadline is inside 21 days, call instead and say so; those go to the front of the queue.
More than a practitioner
- Vice President–West, National Association of Forensic Economics
- Senior Fellow, GW Competition and Innovation Lab, The George Washington University
- Referee, The Journal of Forensic Economics
- Co‑author of the Survey of Forensic Economists (2021, 2024), Journal of Legal Economics
When the question at a hearing is whether a method is generally accepted in the field, it helps to have co‑authored the survey that measures it.
What the work looks like
Anonymized, but with real methods and real numbers.
Exposure understood in time to shape the mediation
The opposing report was arithmetically sound. The number was large because of one unexamined assumption about how long the loss would continue — and that assumption was where the whole figure lived.
Read case study → Employment & wage-and-hourScope set by the data, before the motion
Certification did not turn on the legal theory. It turned on whether the timekeeping data could produce a class-wide number without individualised inquiry — an empirical question, answerable before anyone moved.
Read case study → Wildfire & mass disasterA method that held per claimant and at scale
Hundreds of destroyed and interrupted businesses, one model that had to hold per claimant and at scale — with much of the evidence burned along with the premises.
Read case study →You retain a person
The expert named in your designation is the person who builds the model and sits for the deposition. Every file stays with that named expert.
Roman Garagulagian, Ph.D.
Roman Garagulagian, Ph.D., is an economist who specializes in complex economic damages, litigation analytics, and data-driven expert analysis. He works with attorneys and firms on high-stakes matters involving…
Full profile & CV →
David Cunningham, CPA
David Cunningham is a licensed CPA in California since 1989. He has over 30 years of business experience as a CFO in software development and distribution companies with…
Full profile & CV →
Cristiano Manfre, Ph.D.
Dr. Manfre’s experience includes serving as a financial advisor and strategic consultant to both domestic and international corporations as related to merger, acquisition, divestiture, joint venture, corporate restructuring,…
Full profile & CV →
Britni Wilcher, Ph.D.
Dr. Wilcher is an economist who quantifies compensation disparities and economic loss in employment discrimination and class litigation. Her work is the statistical core of a pay equity…
Full profile & CV →How retaining us actually works
Four steps. No mystery, no discovery call that turns into a sales process.
Conflict check — immediate
You send party names. We run them against our matter database and confirm clear or conflicted immediately.
Scoping call — free, 20–30 minutes
The claims, the data available, the deadlines, the theory. We tell you what is provable, what is not, and what data you need to demand.
Written scope and budget
Before any engagement letter: defined deliverables, an hours estimate by phase, and the retainer. You know the number before you commit.
Preliminary analysis first
We produce a preliminary damages range before writing a report, so you can make settlement decisions early rather than after the expert budget is spent.
Rates and CV, sent together
Rates depend on which expert the matter needs and what the analysis actually requires, so we send the schedule the moment you ask, unprompted, with the CV. You will know what something costs before you spend an hour on a call.
| What you get on request | When |
|---|---|
| Current rate sheet, by role | Same business day |
| CV of the expert who would be designated | Same business day |
| Retainer structure and billing terms | Same business day |
| Conflict check result | Immediate |
| Written scope and phase budget | After the scoping call |
No contingent fees. Our compensation is never tied to the outcome or to the size of the damages figure. This is a NAFE ethical requirement and it is the first thing opposing counsel will ask about at deposition.
Things you can use whether or not you ever hire us
Built for litigators. Most require no email address.
Before you call
Send us the party names. We clear conflicts immediately.
No engagement, no cost, no sales process. If we're conflicted or not the right expert, we'll say so and point you somewhere useful.