Paul Marcus has more than 35 years of experience advising clients on commercial disputes and litigation, corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions, security and business valuation, solvency analysis, investment decision-making. His work also includes advising clients on independent fundamental research and due diligence, strategic planning and financial analysis, raising and providing capital, and originating, structuring, and negotiating complex financial transactions.

Mr. Marcus has analyzed hundreds of businesses to evaluate valuation, solvency, lending, and investments and advise on financial strategy, mergers and acquisitions, financial restructuring, and dispute resolution. As a dispute consultant, he has been asked to value businesses and securities, determine damages resulting from fraud allegations, develop an understanding of complex financial transactions and their practical economic results evaluate lost profits, and perform numerous other analyses.

In addition, Mr. Marcus leads large investigation teams for clients such as the Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Examiner and the Trustee for the Liquidation of Bernie L. Madoff Investment Securities. He is qualified to testify in Federal Court, State Court (including the Delaware Chancery Court), FINRA arbitrations, and AAA arbitrations.

Mr. Marcus’s experience spans numerous industries, including technology (hardware and software), biotechnology, manufacturing, distribution, financial services, professional services, utilities and energy, telecommunications, and textiles. 

Lexology Index (previously Who’s Who Legal) recognizes Mr. Marcus in the category of Consulting Experts – Financial Advisory and Valuation – Quantum of Damages as “a stellar valuation expert with more than three decades of experience.” He is further commended for his “compelling witness testimony in complex domestic and international construction disputes.” As an Arbitration expert, he is praised as “very considerate and [one who] understands all the details relevant to the case well,” and described as “open-minded and very experienced.” He is also noted for being “capable of explaining complex matters in layman’s terms so that the tribunal can easily understand the key concepts.”