Tribal Solutions Group, LLC, et al. v. Joseph Valandra, et al.

• Court: District Court, S.D. Mississippi
• Decided: October 23, 2025
• Docket: 3:23-cv-00010
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION

TRIBAL SOLUTIONS GROUP, LLC, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. CAUSE NO. 3:23-CV-10-CWR-LGI

JOSEPH VALANDRA, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER ON MOTION TO EXCLUDE IN PART

Joseph Valandra, Clayton Wooley, Jase Wilson, Michael Faloon, Ready.net, Inc., and Tribal Ready, Inc designated expert, Sean Sarsfield, for the purpose of producing rebuttal reports criticizing the expert reports produced by Richard Eichmann. Tribal Solutions Group, LLC, Tribal Communications, LLC, Dan C. Davis, and TC2, LLC (the “TC Parties”) moved the Court for an order to exclude portions of Mr. Sarsfield’s opinion and testimony that reference or rely on ex post methodology for calculating economic damages (i.e., rely on information unavailable or unknown on the date of valuation—the so-called “Book of Wisdom” approach). Docket No. 162. The Court held a hearing on this matter on October 20, 2025. For the reasons discussed during the hearing and those included below, the Court denies the TC Parties’ motion. As discussed during the hearing, the applicability of the “Book of Wisdom” approach1 is the subject of an open and robust debate in the field of valuation. The presence of that

1 During the hearing, the Court noted the possible prejudicial effect referring to this method as “the Book of Wisdom” may have at trial. The parties are instructed to refrain from referring to this methodology in this manner before any jurors or prospective jurors. professional disagreement indicates that this is not the type of opinion that Rule 702 was designed to keep out of the courtroom. Fed. R. Evid. 702 advisory committee’s note to 2000 amendments (describing the rule as “broad enough to permit testimony that is the product

of competing principles or methods in the same field of expertise.”). See also United States v. Jordan, No. 3:18-CR-67, 2023 WL 8703773 (S.D. Miss. Dec. 2, 2023) (discussing the effects of the most recent 2023 amendment to Rule 702). Satisfied that Sarsfield has a sufficient basis to support his challenged opinions, the Court finds that the TC Parties may adequately explore the weaknesses of Mr. Sarsfield’s analysis via cross-examination. See Jordan, 2023 WL 8703773, at *4 (“The merits of the expert's conclusions remain subject to attack at trial under traditional principles of ‘[v]igorous cross-examination, presentation of contrary evidence, and careful

instruction on the burden of proof.’”) (quoting Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 596 (1993)). The motion to exclude in part is therefore denied. SO ORDERED, this the 23rd day of October 2025. s/ Carlton W. Reeves UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE