Determining if you have provable damages is often the first step in analyzing whether to pursue a business lawsuit as a shareholder, partner, or member of a limited liability company. Likewise, if you have been sued as a result of a partnership or shareholder dispute, reviewing the exposure or possible damages you face is an important part of determining an appropriate litigation strategy. The question that must be answered is, how will the plaintiff prove to a judge or jury that the damages allegedly sustained are real, quantifiable, and reasonably certain.
In Connecticut, the party that brings the lawsuit has to prove damages with reasonable certainty. A plaintiff must put forth evidence to afford a judge or jury a sufficient basis for estimating the alleged damages with reasonable certainty. In other words, there must be evidence for the court or jury to calculate damages. You cannot simply state “I have lost money” or “I have damages.” There must be proof beyond speculation or your own subjective belief.
On the other hand, Connecticut law does not require exactitude or precision. There are no hard and fast rules as to the level of proof required, but it must rise to the level of reasonable certainty or a reasonable estimate. The level of proof may differ depending on the case facts, and that type of damages at issue.
For example, lost business opportunities may be harder to prove for business attorneys than other types of damages. A recent appellate court case highlighted some of the evidentiary issues with lost profits. In System Pros, Inc v Kasica, two equal shareholders of a company went through a lawsuit involving dissolution of their corporation and a trial on other tortious conduct. At the trial level, the plaintiff shareholder convinced a trial court that he had damages for lost earning opportunities due to wrongful conduct of the other shareholder defendant. To support his case, he admitted in evidence a series of documents and calculations as to wages he would have earned as a consultant if he was not locked out of the business. The trial judge was persuaded and awarded damages.
However, the appellate court reversed on the issue and found that the plaintiff did not prove that he would have been hired as a consultant for any specific opportunities. The appellate court decided:
Although the plaintiff presented ample evidence regarding the nature of the opportunities for employment that were not communicated to him, his testimony as to whether he would in fact have secured such employment resorted to conjecture and subjective opinion, which cannot constitute the basis for an award of damages
The appellate court decided that plaintiff left the trial court to speculate as to the lost opportunities based on plaintiff’s own opinion and assumptions. The appellate court determined there were too many unknowns as to whether plaintiff would have profited from the opportunities he claimed he was denied by the defendant. The court highlighted that plaintiff needed to establish not only that there were opportunities, but that he was qualified for the positions and would have obtained the positions.
The Systems Pros case serves to highlight the various levels of proof that may be required to recover damages in a shareholder lawsuit. To summarize, to establish damages for a shareholder in a business lawsuit, an attorney will need to offer evidence at trial showing a reasonable estimate of damages beyond speculation and personal opinion.