Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Courtland Group, Inc. v. Phillips Gold & Co. LLP
Citations: 876 So. 2d 629; 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8375; 2004 WL 1354250Docket: Nos. 3D03-1455, 3D03-1034
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; June 16, 2004; Florida; State Appellate Court
Courtland Group, Inc. appeals a final judgment unfavorable to its claims against Phillips Gold Company LLP for negligent representation and accounting malpractice, as well as a subsequent cost judgment. The appeal centers on the admissibility of defense expert testimony. The trial included expert witness Neal A. Hochberg, who calculated Courtland’s damages at $1,481,968. Hochberg analyzed the value of Courtland’s contract with HMG and the compensation of Lee Gray, a key executive linked to the case. Conversely, Phillips Gold’s expert, Vincent Love, testified that Courtland suffered no damages, arguing that the contract’s renewability rendered it practically worthless and that Gray’s services, despite allegations of fraud, were beneficial and should offset any claims for compensation. The jury found in favor of Courtland on its claims but concluded that Phillips Gold's negligence did not result in damages. The appellate court supported the trial court's discretion in allowing Love’s testimony, emphasizing that expert opinions must assist the jury on complex matters beyond common understanding. The court affirmed both the judgment and the cost ruling, dismissing further issues raised in the cross-appeal.