• videocam Live Webinar with Live Q&A
  • calendar_month September 10, 2026 @ 1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
  • signal_cellular_alt Intermediate
  • card_travel Class Action
  • schedule 90 minutes

Class Certification: Navigating Scrutiny of Expert Methodologies for Classwide Damages Models

Strengths and Limitations of Surveys, Event Studies, Regression Analysis, and Other Methodologies

About the Course

Introduction

This CLE course will instruct class action attorneys on the state of the law and the latest developments in challenges to the sufficiency of the damages models that plaintiffs offer to support class certification, including attacks on those models based on asserted economic, statistical, or methodological flaws. The panel will discuss how these types of challenges affect predominance, commonality, and other class certification issues.

Description

Proof of damages continues to be critical to class action litigation. It has been black letter law for some time that the damages model that plaintiffs rely on to demonstrate predominance must measure only those damages flowing from the plaintiffs' theory of liability.

Federal courts have continued to police this requirement and have increased scrutiny of proposed classwide damages models, leading to denials of certification where such evidence is missing or invalid.

Plaintiffs turn to a variety of theoretical models to show damages and injury for all class members. Methods to calculate classwide damages include surveys, event studies, regression analysis, and others. The panel will review several such approaches and discuss some of their assumptions and limitations that may affect class certification.

Listen as our authoritative panel explains current trends in the use and court treatment of damages models since Comcast.

Presented By

Alison R. Benedon
Partner
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

Ms. Benedon represents clients in a broad range of complex commercial litigation matters, with a focus on securities litigation. She has substantial experience representing companies and their officers and directors in shareholder class actions and derivative litigations, as well as in high-stakes trials and arbitrations, bankruptcy and restructuring matters, and regulatory and internal investigations.

Robert Neary
Partner
Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton

Mr. Neary's practice includes various areas of complex commercial litigation as well as class actions and multi-district litigation, representing plaintiffs in fraud and deceptive trade practices, tort, and product liability claims. He has litigated actions in both Federal and State courts and has also litigated matters before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

Christina Tusan
Founding Partner
Tusan Law, PC

Ms. Tusan is a nationally recognized trial attorney and the founding partner of Tusan Law, P.C., where she has devoted her career to protecting consumers, whistleblowers, and vulnerable communities from fraud, deception, and abuse. With more than 27 years of experience litigating complex consumer protection, privacy, and unfair competition cases, Ms. Tusan has secured over $1 billion in judgments and settlements on behalf of the public. founding Tusan Law, she served with distinction in high-level public enforcement roles at the Federal Trade Commission, the California Attorney General’s Office, and the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office. 

Credit Information
  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.


  • Live Online


    On Demand

Date + Time

  • event

    Thursday, September 10, 2026

  • schedule

    1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT

I. Introduction: Comcast and its influence on the evidence of class damages

II. Recent decisions affecting the type of evidence needed at certification

III. How courts have recently construed Comcast and its progeny when considering attacks on proposed class damages models

IV. Assumptions and limitations of different types of damages methods

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • What has been the continued legacy of Comcast Corp. v. Behrend with respect to damages models in class litigation?
  • How have recent cases on standing affected how courts analyze plaintiffs' damages models?
  • What are the various damages methods plaintiffs use to demonstrate the predominance of classwide damages and the assumptions and limitations of such methods?
  • What does it mean for damages models to be consistent with theories of liability?