|
Consulting Resource Associates (CRA)
management consultants have developed significant experience working
with employment law defense counsel in an expert witness capacity. In
this work, led by CRA’s president, Kenneth G. Myers, Mr. Myers, two
other CRA Senior Associates and several CRA Research Assistants serve
attorneys in law firm throughout Michigan and across the United States.
Following is a summary description of our litigation support work in
employment law.
Mitigation
CRA is called upon to determine if the
plaintiff in a case has engaged in a reasonable effort in her/his job
search to mitigate a claim for economic damages. In doing this work, we
first call upon our experience as management consultants (see the CRA
Website) advising persons entering the job market to define what
constitutes a reasonable effort in a job search to be successful in
landing a job. We then carefully examine all available information
obtained from the plaintiff on her/his job search activities. With both
the definition of a reasonable effort in a job search and information on
the plaintiff’s job search activities, we render an opinion on whether
the plaintiff has or has not engaged in a reasonable effort in her/his
job search to mitigate a claim for economic damages.
Typically, we supplement this analysis with
research leading to the identification of published and Internet ads for
positions (within a 50 mile radius of the plaintiff’s domicile) for
which the plaintiff is qualified and to which she/he should have
responded. Defense counsel uses these ad copies in deposition and trial
to ask the plaintiff if she/he has seen the ad and replied to it. This
has been a very powerful tool to demonstrate the plaintiff’s diligence
or lack thereof in conducting her/his job search.
Economic Damages
In the examination of plaintiff claimed
economic damages, CRA does the following:
1. We
review the plaintiff economic damages expert’s claimed economic damages
calculation and render an opinion on its correctness or lack thereof.
2. We
perform a calculation of the plaintiff’s potential economic damages. In
doing this work, we frequently employ statistical approaches in our
calculation which the plaintiff economic damages expert often has failed
to employ.
3. We perform both the above cited tasks
and then prepare a reconciliation between the plaintiff expert’s claimed
economic damages calculation and our calculation of potential economic
damages. In doing this, we attempt to clearly explain the shortcomings
of the plaintiff economic damages calculation if such shortcomings or
incorrect calculations are present.
Statistical Inference of Discrimination
CRA, using a highly qualified Ph.D.
university professor in statistics (see CRA Website), determines if a
statistical inference of discrimination exits, or in other instances, if
a statistical inference of discrimination does not exist when so claimed
by plaintiff counsel.
Disparate Treatment Of The Plaintiff
(Compared With Comparable Work Groups)
CRA, again employing statistical
techniques, examines the treatment of the plaintiff in her/his job,
e.g., promotions, demotions, commendations, reprimands, promotion
denials, pay raises, pay raise denials, and compares this treatment with
a like populations of people with similar jobs in the same geographic
area. In doing this, we are able to determine if the plaintiff(s)
has/have received comparable, better or worse treatment than the
comparable work group.
EXPERT WITNESS CASE EXPERIENCE
Following are some of the cases in which
Mr. Myers and/or his CRA Senior Associates have participated in a role
as an expert witness.
Cox, Hodgman & Giarmarco, P.C.
- David M. Johnson
v. Atlas Copco Tools and Assembly Systems, Inc.
Littler Mendelson, P.C.
- Annalisa Byer et
al v. Electronic Data Systems Corp. et al, Circuit Court for the
County of Oakland, State of Michigan, Case No. 04-060951-NZ
- Ronald Marx v.
Electronic Data Systems Corp., District Court of Denton County,
Texas, 362nd Judicial District, Cause No. 2006-40139-362
Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, PLC
- Michael Constant
v. Eastern Michigan University. Circuit Court forvthe County of
Washtenaw, State of Michigan, Case No. 99-10910-CZ
- Gilford, et al v.
Detroit Edison, U.S. District Court Appointed Arbitration Panel, JAG
No. 99-202, Case No. 97-706-639-NO
- Kozlowski and
McKinney v. Courtyard By Marriott, an assumed name of Marriott
Corporation, a Michigan corporation and Associates Bancorp, Inc.,
Second Circuit Court for the County of Berrien, State of Michigan,
Case No. 93-1719-CL-Z
- Terrance v.
Donovan v. Kmart Corporation, Circuit Court for the County of
Oakland, State of Michigan, Case No. 95-491458-CZ
- James S. Henning
v. Marriott Hotels & Resorts, Inc. Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery
County, Ohio, Civil Division, Case No. 94-0442
- Lynn Wayne v. Ted
Stahl, An Individual and Stahl’s United States of America v. City of
Warren, Michigan, City of Warren Police and Firefighters Civil
Service Commission, Rule 19(a), Party, United States District Court,
Civil Action No. 86-CV-75435-DT
- Beverly J. Hayes
v. Zausmer, Fink, James, Dent, Renshaw, and the City of Detroit,
Circuit court for the County of Wayne, State of Michigan, Case No.
95-515504-NZ
- Hill and Knowlton,
Inc. v. Rabin, Katz, Seng and Capitoline International Group, Ltd.,
Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, , Index
No. 23027/92
- Penni Ackerman, v.
Moatesem Aliaf and the Westin Hotel, Circuit Court for the County of
Wayne, State of Michigan, Case No. 98-800713-NO
- William C.
Perkins, II v. Kmart Corporation, Circuit Court for the County of
Oakland, State of Michigan, Case No. 96-53513-CL
- Joseph P. Michael
v. The Oakland press Co./Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. County of Oakland,
State of Michigan, Case No. 94-477349-NO
- Donnetta Brown et
al. v. Board of Education of the Ann Arbor Schools, Circuit Court
for the County of Washtenaw, Case No. 01-1106-CL
- Anton L. Waeschle
v. Ser Solutions, Inc., Unites States District Court, Eastern
District of Michigan, Southern Division, Case No. 01-60257
- Colleen Ostrander
v. Detroit Edison Company, Circuit Court for the County of Wayne,
State of Michigan, Case No. 04-404926-CD
- Professional
Business Consultants, Inc. v. Durow, Inc. d/b/a Wooden Skate v.
John M. White, Circuit Court for the County of Ingham, State of
Michigan, Case No. 05-001523-CK
- Majorie Foote v.
AstraZeneca, United States District Court, Eastern District of
Michigan, Southern Division, Case No. 04-74153
- Donner, et al v.
Hunt Construction Group, Inc. (CRA work on case performed in 2004;
case court, date and case number information TBD)
- Kane, Noll,
Alward and Schultz v. Kelly Services, Inc. U.S. District Court,
Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, Case No. 03-70691
Plunkett Cooney
- Brian D. Yinger v.
Hamlin, Panyard, and Multi-resource Center, Circuit court for the
County of Iron, State of Michigan, file No. I-92-4803-CZ
- Mary S. Barker v.
City of Croswell, Circuit Court for the County of Sanilac, State of
Michigan, Case No. 95-23514-CL
- Kim Graham v.
Burger King
- James Shepich and
Mary Kay Shepich v. West Iron County Sewer Authority, Circuit
court of Iron, State of Michigan, File No. I-92-4803-CZ
- Mark Blondin v.
Johnston Coca-Cola Corporation and Pam Wright, Circuit Court for the
County of Genesee, Case No. 92-15706-CL. Bottling Group, Inc.,
Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Michigan and Lee Scott, Circuit Court
for the County of Emmet, State of Michigan, Case No. 96-3712-CZ
Gunsberg and Breskin, P.C.
- Heather Chunn v.
Gala Industries, Inc., Circuit Court for the County of Washtenaw,
State of Michigan, Case No. 97-8399-CZ
- Owens, Lickfelt,
Myers and Henkel v. Tecumseh Products Co., Circuit court for the
County of Lenawawee, State of Michigan, Case No. 95-6575-CL
Barlow and Lange, P.C.
- Gloria Cass v.
Lakeview School District, Circuit Court for the County of Macomb,
State of Michigan, Case No. 93-5164-NZ
- Danial B. Klaper
v. Mike Savoie, Jr., Keith Studzinski and Mike Savoie Chevrolet,
Inc., Circuit court for the County of Oakland, State of Michigan,
Civil Action No. 92-440725-CZ
Dykema, P.C.
- Dennis Butler and
w, George Shepard v. Aeroquip Corporation, Circuit Court for the
County of Jackson, State of Michigan, Case No. 92-63241-CZ
- Philip and
Margaret Weeden v. Doorcraft of Michigan, Macomb County Circuit
court, State of Michigan, Case No. 96-5778-CZ
Kathryn Falk Fehman
- Long, Mahar,
Theunik and Davey v. City of Saginaw, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, and
Teamsters Local 129, United States District Court, Eastern District
of Michigan, Southern Division, File No. 83-CV-7265-BC
Keller, Thomas, A Professional Services
Corporation
- Tamara Crawford v.
Henry Ford Health System, Circuit Court for the County of Wayne,
State of Michigan, Case No. 98-834386-CZ
- James Bohler v.
Utility Lines Construction Services, Inc., Circuit Court for the
County of Wayne, State of Michigan, Case No. 04-404926-CD
Foley & Lardner
- United States v.
City of Warren, united States District Court, Eastern District, Case
No. 80-CV-75435-DT
- William P. Bitonti,
et al v. Raytheon Support Services Co. et al., Macomb County Circuit
Court, Case No. 99-5131-CL
- Kolesar, et al.,
v. Visteon Corporation, Wayne County Circuit Court, Case No.
01-117371-CL
- Morvin Burnett v.
Quest Diagnostics, Inc. Case No. 02-73592
- Fulco v. Equity
Residential Properties
- Paul Stimpson v.
United Parcel Services, NLRB Compliance Hearing, Case No. 7-CA-41749
- Michael Sargent v.
Covanta Haverhill, Inc. a/k/a Covanta Energy Group, Inc.,
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Essex Superior Court, Civil Action
No. ESCV2004-00361-A
Miller & Martin PLLC
- James McElroy v.
Phillips Medical Systems North America, Inc., United States district
Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Case No. 3 01 1293
- Melvin Moore v.
Averitt Express, Inc., United States District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama, Western Division, Civil Action No.
7:07-CV-0311-JEO (Case in process)
Williams Acosta PLLC
- Thomas v .
Ferguson et al
|
