Measuring Liability

In trial or deposition litigators rely on Analytic Focus for defensible independent evaluations. Why?


Establishing liability through scientific analysis requires showing that claims made in a complaint are both provable and true.  Just saying it’s so doesn’t cut it.  To prove, scientifically, that something is true requires a solid and impregnable methodology.  That’s what we do, and we have developed these methods in multiple practice areas.  For antitrust violations, we develop “but-for” analyses to demonstrate that there was an impact on a company.  in securities analyses, we use event studies to establish that the return of or the price for a security changed relative to a common market.  Intellectual property infringement requires showing that consumers are confused by similar trademarks or trade dress.  For claims of deceptive sales practices, we show that a consumer has been deceived by questionable claims.


At times, we are asked to review the work of experts struggling to establish liability and, through careful consideration of the problem and the methods used, demonstrate that the analysis presented relies on unwarranted assumptions, flawed and undersized samples, or that unconsidered intervening factors explain what the expert has attributed to the Defendant.  In short, there is a great deal of work out there promulgated as establishing liability that doesn’t meet the basic scientific requirements for legitimate research.


We apply scientific methods to assess whether an alleged claim or act is true.  Has the claimant been negatively impacted, and if so was it due to the actions of the Defendant?   This might include use of statistical analysis, artificial intelligence methods to discover patterns, testing of hypotheses, and other commonly accepted methods to study cause-and-effect relationships.


Stuck on where to start?  We are expert at setting up the testing protocols, and likewise we are expert at collecting and extrapolating the data needed to conduct tests.  We help our clients in developing robust datasets for evaluating claims.  Frequently, we find multiple databases that need to be combined to tell the whole story.  We can collect data in a survey and then link the data to information gleaned from the Census Bureau or other Federal databases that help fully inform the analysis that is needed.  We don’t merely conduct the analysis – we go out and get the data needed to back up the work.  Incomplete data and incomplete hypotheses undercut any liability analysis.  We want to get to the truth – full data and full analysis that gets us to the full conclusion.


  • Auditing
  • Data Analysis
  • Data Collection
  • Data Mining
  • Disparate Impact Studies
  • Comprehensive Reviews
  • Damages Calculations
  • Demographic Analysis
  • Econometric Analysis
  • Economic Impact Analysis
  • eDiscovery
  • Expert Testimony
  • Forecasting
  • Forensic Analysis
  • Legal Feasibility
  • Modeling
  • Pleading Documentation
  • Programming
  • Quality Control
  • Real Time Dashboard Analytics
  • Rebuttal Examination
  • Regulatory Compliance Analysis
  • Research
  • Risk Management
  • Statistical Sampling
  • Secure Hosted Solution
  • Simulation Studies
  • Statistical, Economic, and Financial Consulting
  • Survey Design, Reliability and Validity Testing
  • Survival Analysis
  • Time Series Analysis
  • Trial and Deposition Preparation
  • Valuation

Practice Areas:

  • Complex Litigation
  • Product Liability
  • False Claims
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Healthcare
  • Fair Housing / Lending
  • Antitrust
  • Securities
  • Structure Finance and Derivatives
  • Intellectual Property
  • Construction Defects
  • Environmental / Mass Tort
  • Class Actions
  • Banking and Finance
  • Regulatory Compliance
  • Insurance and Reinsurance
  • Labor and Employment