Australia: The one about the judge, the forensic accountant, the Mexican marketing expert and the well-known psychic and astrologer

Last Updated: 4 June 2012
Article by John Temple-Cole

Bart Enterprises & other v Walter Mercado Salinas & Astromundo Inc., United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, No. 09-15971


Taking a bold step into the unknown (or perhaps the mystical), in this edition of Expert Matters we depart from our usual practice of discussing the decisions of Australian Courts. Mercado is, to put it mildly, one of the more bizarre judgments we have come across dealing with expert evidence.


The case was an appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

It involved a contract dispute between Bart Enterprises International Inc. and Walter Mercado Salinas. Bart Enterprises was "in the business of producing and distributing entertainment programming," and Mercado was "a well-known psychic and astrologer who provides psychic and astrological counselling to the public." 1

In the 1995 contract, Mercado 2 assigned the rights in the "Walter Mercado" trademark to Bart, giving it the right to produce, market, and distribute his trademarked materials in exchange for regular payments to him. The contract also allowed Bart to re-assign its contractual rights, which it did to some extent to other entities in the "Bart Group".

The parties amicably did business for eleven years. Mercado's story is that trouble began when Bart fell behind on its payments to him, and as a result he attempted to terminate. The Bart Group's story is that it was not in arrears, and Mercado breached the agreement by failing to attend scheduled appearances, failing to provide required materials, and improperly attempting to terminate the contract.

The Judges summed up the state of the relationship between the parties by quoting some song lyrics:

It may be true, as the song lyrics say, that:

"When the moon is in the Seventh House

And Jupiter aligns with Mars

Then peace will guide the planets

And love will steer the stars,"

But there was no peace and love between these parties after their contractual dispute arose. 3

Bart's complaint asserted in six counts that Mercado or Astromundo (his company) had breached his contract and tortiously interfered with the contracts that Bart Group had with two television stations, by directly entering into contracts with those stations. Mercado denied liability and filed counterclaims seeking, inter alia, a ruling that Bart Enterprises owed him fees and commissions and that he had the right to inspect "all of the accounting books and supporting documentation" to determine the amounts that he was owed, which was granted.

Had Mercado's psychic powers been greater he might have foreseen that the partie's relationship was star-crossed and his dealings with the entertainment company would end in a way that was anything but entertaining. Or maybe the problems was that Mercado could see only so far into the future, because things went pretty well for about eleven years.

First instance decisions and appeal

A jury in the district court found that Bart had not breached the parties' contract but that Mercado had breached it by: (1) improperly terminating it; (2) hiring another exclusive agent while the parties' contract was still in force; and (3) failing to perform after 22 November 2006. The jury also found that the Bart Group owed Mercado a fiduciary duty separate and apart from the parties' contract but that it had not breached that duty to Mercado.

In a second phase of the trial, the jury considered, inter alia, the question of damages for Mercado's breach of contract. It found that neither Bart nor its assignees had been damaged.

Unhappy that it was not awarded any damages for Mercado's breach, Bart appealed.

The Experts

One ground for appeal was Bart's contention that the district court abused its discretion by striking Bart's six proposed expert witnesses, who were offered as experts in the following:

  • Intellectual property transactions under Puerto Rican law
  • Forensic accounting and valuation
  • The United States marketing industry
  • International telecom, television, and SMS industry
  • Mexican marketing and artist representation4, and
  • A "responsive expert."

Testimony from those experts was not allowed because Bart failed to comply with the disclosures required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a). 5 Whilst broadly similar to those used by Australian Courts, it is worth noting that Rule 26(a) requires experts testifying in US Federal courts to also disclose:

  • The witness's qualifications, including a list of all publications authored in the previous 10 years
  • A list of all other cases in which, during the previous four years the witness testified as an expert at trial or by deposition
  • A statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case.

Further, the relevant disclosures relating to each expert's evidence must be made "at the times and in the sequence that the court orders." Failure to do so will mean that "the party is not allowed to use that information or witness to supply evidence . . . at a trial, unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless."

Bart focused its arguments on the court's decision to strike the proposed testimony of its forensic accounting expert, Mr C, whose report it said was timely served on Mercado and that it "complied with the spirit of" and "substantially complied with" Rule 26.

The court had noted that Mr C's report was the only one of the Bart Group's experts whose "report" even arguably complied with the requirements of Rule 26(a). Problems included that his report was not provided to Mercado until after close of business on the date ordered by the court. Even then, Bart did not provide a "report" of the type envisioned by Rule 26, but instead faxed a letter stating Mr C's services would be limited to:

  1. Providing a net present value calculation of future damages claimed by Plaintiffs as of the date of the trial. I have included (attached[)] the formulas that he will be using for that function.
  2. Providing a calculation of pre-judgment interest on the monetary stream of claimed past damages.
  3. Rebuttal services with regard to any opinions, conclusions or applications of your damage/breach expert and/or claims or attacks upon the Plaintiffs['] damage calculations/claims.

The faxed materials did include some "formulas for calculating present value" and an unsigned page titled "damages report" ($14.7 million) but without explanation of how that amount was arrived at. Further, no CV was attached to the above, and there was no report stating, much less explaining, Mr C's opinions.

"There were a number of problems with the form and substance of the [the accounting expert] is the only one of the Bart Group's experts whose "report" -and we are being charitable in calling it that -even arguably complied with the requirements of Rule 26(a)."6

Bart argued that "any non-compliance" was "cured" when Mercado took Mr C's deposition, during which he disclosed that he had been retained only to rebut any report and trial testimony by Mercado's accounting expert. Those arguments were unsuccessful. As Mercado's counsel recounted:

[A]s of November 20th [court ordered deadline] ... there were no opinions, no memos, nothing. And through today, through this morning, when I took this gentleman's deposition, there was absolutely no report provided by him.

He provided this morning a draft of some document that he says he's working on, and that he intends to use, which is basically a summary of the numbers that were provided to him in one of the items that we attached to our motion [to strike] which is titled "damage report."

And he testified this morning that he took those numbers and put them in this rough draft that he's working on so that he can attempt to calculate, I think, from what he said, present value of those numbers. And that's as far as he has gotten with his draft of that report.

The court refused to grant any further waivers of the expert timetable. It conceded however to allow Mr C to be present in the courtroom during the testimony of Mercado's damages expert, and to advise counsel about cross-examination. Bart insisted that its failure to comply with the rule and the court's order about disclosure would not have harmed Mercado if Mr C had been allowed to testify because Mercado had deposed him before trial. As the court explained, however, Bart's defiance of the rule and order meant that Mercado "had to depose [Mr C] without the benefit of a report containing his opinions or records supporting his testimony, which was not yet final."

The court reasoned that "[c]learly, being unable to adequately prepare for a deposition constitutes harm" to Mercado, and therefore denied the motion for a new trial.

Further accounting evidence

Bart also contended that it was entitled to a new trial on damages because the jury's verdict awarding no damages was contrary to the great weight of evidence at trial.

This argument centred on two exhibits that Bart introduced showing income and expense summaries from 2005 to 2008 for five of the corporate plaintiffs. It argued that these showed a "precipitous drop" from November 2006, which is the date that Mercado breached the parties' contract.

Even though Bart asserted that the evidence about the loss of income was "uncontested," it acknowledged that Mercado's accounting expert, Mr M, testified that in his view the documents showed that Bart had been operating at a net loss and suffered no damages as a result of Mercado's breach. Executives for Bart testified in favour of a contrary set of inferences.

The district court explained that the weight of the evidence was not contrary to the jury's finding that Mercado had not proximately caused any damages to the Bart Group because:

[T]he jury could have chosen not to accept the evidence [the Bart Group] presented as much of the damage evidence was prepared by [the Bart Group] for trial and [it] proffered few, if any, original documents in support of [its] damages claims.

On appeal it was therefore found that the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to grant the Bart Group a new trial on damages based on the sufficiency of the evidence. 7

In a final (and ultimately fruitless) attempt to argue for a retrial on damages, Bart objected to a comment the judge made to the jury in phase II of the trial. After instructing the jury on the law, the court closed with these words: On behalf of everyone, thank you so very much for your patience and your good humor and your attention. It has really been a pleasure working with you all. God speed and may you have the judgment of Solomon. Whilst perhaps worth a read (if only for the sake of amusement), further coverage in this newsletter was thought to be unjustified.


As is probably clear, Bart's attempts to argue for a retrial were unsuccessful. In closing, it was noted:

Advancing the argument that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, the Bart Group contends that all of the district court's "errors" add up to an abuse of discretion that justifies granting a new trial. Because we have determined that there were no errors constituting an abuse of discretion, there was no accumulation of error either.

And on a final (musical) note, it was noted:

The Bart Group has not shown that any of the challenged rulings by the district court constituted an abuse of discretion. Nothing plus nothing is nothing, just as "nothing from nothing leaves nothing." 8


This case highlights the significant differences in the way that expert evidence is managed pursuant to Rule 26 and the relevant Australian court guidelines. We are uncertain as to how many Australian experts would have a complete list of "all articles authored in the last 10 years" readily available! The issue of whether the quantum of fees earned by an expert should be disclosed has been recently debated and rejected in Australia. 9

A clear similarity, however, is that the expert must observe both the relevant court guidelines for expert evidence and any specific orders made for the delivery of that evidence, or risk the exclusion of their evidence. The expert must therefore ensure that they understand and comply with all of the orders that have been made in relation to their evidence.


1 Not being familiar with Mercado's talents, we undertook extensive research (on Wikipedia). His television career apparently began with a weekly astrology show on Puerto Rican television. His filmography includes three movies, including Finding Papi, where he plays the role of a fortune teller who reads the horoscopes of three women seeking to establish the fidelity of their boyfriend. Few details are provided of his specialist study, training or experience, which presumably would be problematic if he were ever called to act as an expert witness in Australian proceedings.

2 In October 2010, Mercado announced that he would now be referred to as "Shanti Ananda," a translation in Sanskrit of "peace happiness". He says a "being of light" imparted a spiritual revelation to him, which he refers to as his "authentic mystic name". In this article, we continue to refer to him as "Mercado".

3 The song lyrics were attributed to The 5 th Dimension's "Aquarius / Let the Sunshine In", The Age of Aquarius (Soul City Records 1969). Readers may recall this from the soundtrack of Forrest Gump. We are unaware of song lyrics being quoted in any Australian judgements.

4 There are no clues in the judgment as to how the expertise of this expert was thought relevant to the issues.


6 Refer to Appeal Judgement of Carnes, Kravitch and Silver, Circuit Judges dated 23 August 2011, page 14 and 15.

7 Other proceedings appear to be ongoing. According to our extensive Wikipedia research, Mercado subsequently lost a case brought against Bart, allowing Bart to continue using Mercado's name and likeness in future commercial projects. It is reported that, when asked about his legal case over the rights to his name he replied, "I worked for many years, and gave some releases without thinking much about human wickedness".

8 Attributed to Billy Preston, "Nothing from Nothing", On The Kids and Me (A&M Records 1974)


The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

John Temple-Cole
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.