CRA was retained by a mid‑sized law firm to review opposing expert reports and provide expert testimony in an employment dispute brought by a former partner alleging gender‑based pay discrimination and constructive termination.
The claimant’s experts asserted that she had been paid “statistically significantly lower” than comparable male attorneys and presented multimillion‑dollar damages estimates tied to alleged unequal compensation, lost earnings, unreimbursed expenses, and costs associated with launching her own practice. CRA was asked to evaluate whether these expert submissions offered credible economic support for the claimant’s allegations.
CRA’s review found that the claimant’s expert analyses relied on inaccurate data, inappropriate statistical methods, and comparisons that failed to account for similarly situated male colleagues or all of the factors influencing attorney compensation. The damages analysis compounded these flaws by relying on the same faulty assumptions and overstating alleged losses through flawed mitigation calculations.
CRA concluded that the reports did not provide viable evidence of an equal pay violation or economic damages. Following CRA’s testimony and analysis, all of the claimant’s claims were denied and the respondent’s counterclaims were granted in part.
