Can there ever be 12 million good reasons for an expert to be up close and intimate with the mechanics of his/her exhibit spreadsheets?

While at trial the plaintiff’s attorney during cross examination focused upon the spreadsheet used by the defense’s economic expert to allegedly prove that there were zero economic damages. The expert had relied heavily upon research assistants to construct the spreadsheet, but under the expert’s supervision. Unfortunately, the expert had not carefully examined the calculations and was not aware of several calculation errors. The spreadsheet was blown up as a trial exhibit, along with an alternate spreadsheet with corrected figures. The expert’s testimony at trial was inconsistent with the corrected spreadsheet. The expert was forced to acknowledge to the court the calculation error, and tried to explain it was not a serious one. Yet it was too late. The jury lost confidence in the testimony. The jury awarded the plaintiff more than $12 million in damages.