Frequently Asked Questions

Forensic Decisioneering applies advanced analytics, financial modeling, and decision science to legal matters where outcomes must withstand adversarial scrutiny. Our work is purpose-built to support litigation strategy, expert testimony, damages analysis, regulatory exposure, and executive decision-making under legal standards of reliability and relevance. 

We serve law firms and in-house legal departments only. We do not accept commercial, operational, or consulting engagements outside the legal domain. This exclusive focus ensures our methods, documentation, and deliverables are aligned with litigation and regulatory expectations from day one.

Legal matters impose standards that do not exist in commercial consulting, such as evidentiary reliability, methodological transparency, chain-of-logic defensibility, and expert-level scrutiny. By working exclusively with legal teams, we design every analysis to meet those standards without retrofitting or compromise. 

Large firms often adapt commercial analytics for legal use. We do the opposite: our methodologies are built specifically for legal defensibility.

Key differences include:

• Legal-first analytical design
• Documentation structured for expert disclosure
• Clear linkage between data, assumptions, and conclusions
• Independence from audit, tax, or advisory conflicts
• Direct collaboration with trial teams and experts

We support expert testimony through rigorously documented analysis, model validation, sensitivity testing, and rebuttal-ready exhibits. Engagements may include expert support, shadow expert work, or serving as a testifying expert, depending on jurisdictional needs and engagement structure. 

Our analyses are designed to meet Daubert expectations, including:

• Use of reliable, testable methodologies
• Transparent assumptions and data sources
• Replicable models and calculations
• Peer-defensible analytical logic
• Clear error rates, sensitivity analyses, and limitations
  This ensures findings can withstand motions challenging admissibility.

We engage at all stages, including:

• Pre-filing case assessment
• Pleadings and early strategy
• Discovery and damages modeling
• Expert preparation and rebuttal
• Settlement evaluation
• Regulatory response and oversight matters
  Early engagement often yields the greatest strategic advantage.

We support complex legal matters such as:

• Commercial and contract disputes
• Damages and economic loss analysis
• Regulatory-exposed matters
• Financial and operational causation analysis
• Valuation disputes
• Class and mass-action analytics
• High-stakes settlement modeling

We are not auditors, tax advisors, or operational consultants to the opposing side. Our independence is structural and contractual, supporting credibility with courts, regulators, and opposing experts. 

We integrate directly with legal teams, aligning analysis with legal theories, claims, and defenses. Our role is collaborative but independent, thereby, providing clear, decision-ready insight without advocacy overreach. 

Engagements are scoped precisely to the legal question at hand. 

Deliverables may include:

• Defensible analytical models
• Expert-ready exhibits and schedules
• Sensitivity and scenario analyses
• Executive-level summaries for counsel and clients
• Deposition and rebuttal support materials

All engagements are structured to respect confidentiality, privilege, and work-product considerations. We routinely operate within attorney-directed frameworks and coordinate closely with counsel on information handling protocols. 

Yes. Our work is designed to be reviewed, challenged, and defended. Every conclusion is traceable to data, assumptions, and methodology without black-box analytics or unsupported opinion. 

Our analytical framework does not change based on litigation posture. We apply the same methodology to evaluate reliability, error rates, and application consistency. Outcomes depend on the empirical record, not the party engaging us. 

Engagements begin with a confidential discussion to understand the legal posture, timing, and analytical needs. From there, we provide a clearly scoped, RFP-ready proposal aligned with litigation and regulatory requirements.