Hello and thank you for taking the time to take a look at our website.  My introductory goals are to make this biographic statement no longer than it needs to be and to give you some personal insight as to who I am and what I do before you read my CV.

As a valuation economist I work as a decision counselor, litigation advisor/expert witness, arbitrator/mediator, and forensic investigator. I’ve been involved in many major national litigated cases with total claims in excess of $1-trillion, taught for the FBI Academy in Quantico, VA, am a published author, and served as a tax appeals commissioner for the Washington, DC.  My objective is to reduce complex valuation issues down to the brass tacks, bringing clarity on matters where confusion can otherwise reign.

When one is holding a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  Likewise, the valuation technician too often only sees the pathway to a value conclusion.  Where the contractor may ask, “where do you want your building constructed?,” the professional architect or engineer asks, “what is it you’re attempting to accomplish by constructing a new building?” Construction is to architecture and engineering as valuation is to valuation economics.  They are integrally connected, but one focuses on the development of an answer and the other focuses on the development of the question and the process to derive a meaningful answer.  To illustrate this point, it’s now very clear that asking a valuer in 2005, just prior to the bursting of the housing bubble, “what’s the value of this home,” was generally the wrong question.  

Anyone dealt with valuation opinions in litigation must recognize that the courtroom Battle Royale, matching two valuation experts against each other, is a process that often does not work well.  The reason is that often the analysis, report, and testimony of the witnesses is often not developed in a way to answer the question that is begged by the litigation.  Giving a brilliant answer to the wrong question happens by novice and nationally renowned experts. The development of a value or damage calculation and the development of an answer responsive to the litigation can be two entirely different things.  In my work on tens of thousands of valuation matters and over a trillion dollars of litigated claims, even working with some of the most respected witnesses and lawyers in the country, I can assure you the development of a meaningful and well-articulated analysis does not happen by accident and it too rarely happens at all.  Failure to develop that meaningful story leaves judges, juries, and other triers-of-fact confused and frustrated, and their decision up to chance.  

What a valuation economist is able to do is identify the meaningful issues, tying in and the pathway to develop a meaningful answer that can withstand the scrutiny of the litigation process and that is crystal clear.  I act as advisor and/or expert witness in this process.  As an arbitrator, I have the ability to challenge appraisal testimony to a level that is difficult for an attorney or an appraiser to.

As clients and experts with whom I have worked will tell you and have told others, I am adept at looking for opportunities to clarify issues and bring efficiency to disputed matters.  Where I find problems with the work of other experts, I develop meaningful criticisms of their work, not a gotcha list of technical or standards violations that put triers-of-fact to sleep.  

Those are just some of what I do that bring me joy and my clients success.  The remainder of this dialog will explain some of the ways I do what I do.  I love my work in helping others to put their best foot forward.  In fact, both feet.  I look forward to hearing from you so I may better answer your specific questions.  Even if you merely want to bounce some ideas off of me (no charge), please feel free to give me a call.