MKennedy Forensic Experts
Forensic accounting and expert testimony for disputed numbers.
When money is in dispute, the calculation matters less than whether it survives — a Daubert challenge, a deposition, cross-examination. Whether you are proving a loss or testing one, that is the standard we build to on every engagement.
Practice areas — Business interruption · Lost profits · Builders risk · Construction delay · Fraud investigation · Unjust enrichment · Economic damages
Why firms retain us
You are not buying accounting hours. You are buying a number that holds up.
An expert engagement is risk reduction: an analyst whose report survives a Daubert / FRE 702 challenge and whose testimony holds under cross. Every model we produce is built for the challenge it will face — each figure traceable to a source document, every assumption documented, the methodology stated plainly.
What we do
Two buyers. Two problems. One discipline.
For attorneys
Trial-ready economic damages and rebuttal work — built to survive the challenge it will face.
- Lost profits & economic damages
- Business interruption & builders risk
- Construction delay damages
- Fraud & unjust enrichment
- Rebuttal of opposing experts
For insurers & claims professionals
Fast, defensible, documented numbers that close a file — and hold if it is ever litigated.
- First-party property & BI claims
- Lost-profits & loss-of-income analysis
- Suspected-fraud & overstated-loss review
- Subrogation support
- Independent, source-documented findings
How an engagement works
Four steps. No surprises.
The same disciplined intake on every matter — so counsel and carriers always know what happens next.
Conflict check
Run first, always — before any details of the matter are discussed.
Written scope & fee
A clear retainer and rate in a written engagement letter. No surprises.
Deadline in writing
Your date is committed up front, in writing — because counsel and carriers replace experts over missed dates, not fees.
Defensible work
A source-documented model, delivered on schedule, ready for challenge.
What counsel and carriers check
The four things every buyer tests before retaining an expert.
| The test | How we answer it |
|---|---|
| Credibility — will this expert survive cross? | A verifiable CV, published credentials, and a documented testifying history. Easy to vet the way opposing counsel would. |
| Clarity — can they explain money to a jury? | Complex financial analysis rendered in plain, defensible terms. Clarity is the audition. |
| Independence — are they objective? | A conflict check on every matter, run first. Our product is defensible neutrality, never advocacy. |
| Reliability — will they hit the deadline? | Turnaround committed in writing — because experts are replaced over missed dates, not fees. |
Common questions
What counsel and carriers ask first.
Economic damages and lost profits, business interruption, builders risk, construction-delay damages, fraud investigation, and unjust enrichment — retained by trial counsel and by insurers and claims professionals in federal and state matters.
Both — and for carriers and third-party administrators. The work product is independent, source-documented analysis rather than advocacy, and a conflict check is run on every matter before an engagement begins.
Always with a conflict check. If clear, you receive a written scope and fee letter, with the deadline committed in writing before work begins.
Every model is built for the challenge it will face under FRE 702 and Daubert: the methodology is stated plainly, assumptions are anchored to facts, and every figure is traceable to a source document. Outcomes depend on the specific facts of each matter.
Only enough to run a conflict check — the type of matter and the parties involved. No privileged or confidential details are needed at first contact.
Hourly rates and the retainer are set out in the written scope and fee letter before any work begins — no surprises mid-engagement. A current fee schedule is available on request.
Yes — first-party business-interruption, lost-income, builders-risk, and suspected-fraud claim reviews are a core practice. The work product is an independent, source-documented number: it moves the file, and the same analysis holds if the claim is later litigated.
Your date is committed in writing before the engagement begins — set against the matter's actual deadline. If a date cannot be met, you hear that before you engage, not after.
Have a matter with disputed numbers?
The first step is always a conflict check. Send the basics — no confidential details — and you will have a clear answer, a written scope, and a committed timeline.