Deposition preparation in a product liability matter follows the injury or death pattern with added attention to the claimant's but-for path. For a child or student, opposing counsel will test the educational attainment assumption and the occupational data used to price it; for a homemaker or retiree, the household services hours and wage rates; for a worker, the same earnings, benefits, and care assumptions as any injury claim. The economist should be able to support the attainment assumption from the family and school record, tie the household services to time-use data and the claimant's documented role, and show the result under alternatives.
Checklist
Review the educational attainment assumption and its support for a child or student claimant
Verify the household services hours and wage rates for a homemaker or retiree claimant
Confirm the life expectancy and worklife applied and their basis
Confirm the future care valued ties to the plan or the treating recommendations
Assemble the reliance file and the opposing report
Questions to ask the economist
What supports the educational attainment assumption, and what is the result under a lower attainment level?
How did you set the household services hours and rates?
What life expectancy did you apply, and what changes under the opposing side's figure?
Which inputs came from other experts?
Timeline
One to two preparation sessions in the two weeks before the deposition, after the report and the reliance materials are final.
Required documents
The final report and the sources behind attainment, hours, and rates
School records, family history, or the household documentation relied on
The medical opinions on work restrictions and life expectancy
The opposing economist's report
Common pitfalls
Assuming the highest plausible attainment for a child without record support
Applying adult worklife assumptions to a claimant who was retired or not in the workforce
Using national wage rates for household services where local rates are available
How does the economist support a lost earning capacity figure for a young child?
By stating the attainment assumption and its basis in the family and school record, pricing it with earnings data by educational level, applying a worklife expectancy, and showing the result under alternative attainment levels. The sensitivity table lets the fact finder choose the path the evidence supports.
How does the economist defend an educational attainment assumption for a child?
With the family's educational history, the child's school records where they exist, and the attainment data for children of similar background, and by showing the result under lower and higher attainment levels. The assumption is presented as a stated choice with its evidence, not as a prediction. Opposing counsel's alternative is usually already in the sensitivity table.
What reliance materials matter most in a product case?
The school, family, or household documentation behind the but-for path, the medical opinions on work restrictions and life expectancy, the life care plan or treating recommendations if care is claimed, the time-use data and local replacement rates for household services, and the earnings data by educational level. Because the claimant often has no wage history, the file should show every source the but-for path was built from.
References
U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). American Community Survey (ACS). U.S. Department of Commerce. census.gov
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (n.d.). American Time Use Survey (ATUS). U.S. Department of Labor. bls.gov
Skoog, G. R., Ciecka, J. E., & Krueger, K. V. (2011). The Markov process model of labor force activity: Extended tables of central tendency, shape, percentile points, and bootstrap standard errors. Journal of Forensic Economics, 22(2), 165-229. doi.org