A South Carolina federal court found that Companion Property and Casualty Insurance Company’s expert’s testimony did not satisfy its obligation to provide a damages calculation. Companion argued that its failure to disclose the precise method by which it calculated its alleged damages was immaterial because the method of damages calculation is the subject of expert evidence. But the Court held that mere reliance on expert evidence did not satisfy the disclosure requirement under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1)(A)(iii).

Defendants specifically requested Companion provide a computation of damages, including those under the reinsurance trust agreement it allegedly had to pay from its own funds due to a shortfall of collateral in the trust accounts. Companion referred instead to its expert testimony on the issue, and the Defendants moved to compel disclosure.

The Court agreed with the Defendants that an expert report does not stand in the shoes of the required disclosure under the Fed.R.Civ.P., and ordered Companion to provide an initial estimate as to each damage category (except punitive damages) and a general analysis as to how that figure was computed.

Companion Property and Casualty Insurance Company v. U.S. Bank National Association, 3:15-cv-01300 (USDC D.S.C. June 24, 2016)