McKesson Corp. v. Green

The trial court did not err in dismissing the plaintiffs' suit against the defendants for fraud and RICO violations without prejudice, since its ruling to exclude the plaintiff's expert's testimony did not amount to a final decision that would terminate the case in defendants' favor.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

McKesson Corporation and McKesson Information Solutions Inc. appeal the trial court’s order overruling their objection to the plaintiffs’ voluntary dismissal without prejudice and their motion for attorney fees. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. McKesson, a large, publicly traded healthcare supply management company, acquired McKesson Information Solutions LLC, formerly known as HBO and Company HBOC. The plaintiffs, Holcombe T. Green, HTG Corp., and Hall Family Investments, L.P., owned stock in HBOC, which was converted to McKesson stock. After the merger, McKesson announced that, according to its audit, HBOC had overstated its pre-merger earnings, and McKesson’s stock price plummeted.

The plaintiffs sued McKesson for fraud and RICO violations, contending that they were induced to hold their HBOC stock while the financial statements reflected inflated earnings, which became worth much less after McKesson announced the earnings overstatement. The parties conducted discovery, and the trial court denied McKesson’s motion for summary judgment on the fraud claim, finding that the plaintiffs produced evidence creating material issues of fact on all elements of fraud. It granted McKesson’s motion on the RICO claim, finding that the plaintiffs had no standing to make it. In the same order, the trial court determined that the plaintiffs’ damages expert did not meet the federal Daubert standards imposed by OCGA § 24-9-67.1 and granted McKesson’s motion in limine to exclude his testimony. The merits of those decisions are not before us. The trial court later denied the plaintiffs’ motion to name a new expert on damages because the plaintiffs had agreed to serve their expert reports long ago; it had already allowed the plaintiffs to submit a fourth damages calculation before it ruled on the Daubert issue; and because the scheduling order precluded any additional damages opinions.

McKesson Corp. v. Green

The trial court did not err in dismissing the plaintiffs' suit against the defendants for fraud and RICO violations without prejudice, since its ruling to exclude the plaintiff's expert's testimony did not amount to a final decision that would terminate the case in defendants' favor.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report