Deposition preparation in a traumatic brain injury matter centers on the inputs the economist took from others and on how the components reconcile. Opposing counsel will ask where the post-injury work capacity came from, whether the earnings path for a young person rests on the record or on optimism, how attendant care and supervision hours in the life care plan relate to the household services claim, and which growth rate was applied to each care category. The economist should be able to name the source of every input, show that the components do not overlap, and explain the sensitivity of the total to the plan's largest items.
Checklist
Confirm the source of the post-injury work capacity used in the report and that it matches the current opinion
Verify the but-for path for a young person against school records, family history, and occupational data
Reconcile attendant care and supervision hours in the plan with the household services claim
Review the growth rates applied by care category and the sensitivity of the total to the largest plan items
Assemble the reliance file and the opposing report
Questions to ask the economist
What did you rely on for the post-injury earning capacity, and did you form any opinion of your own on it?
How did you avoid counting supervision hours in the plan and household services for the same time?
How does the total change if the largest care items are removed or reduced?
What supports the educational attainment assumption for a young claimant?
Timeline
One to two preparation sessions in the two weeks before the deposition, after the life care plan, the work-capacity opinion, and the report are final.
Required documents
The final report and the item-level tables tying each valued item to the plan
The neuropsychological, treating, and work-capacity opinions
School records, earnings history, and family history for a young claimant
The opposing economist's report
Common pitfalls
Letting the economist appear to have formed a work-capacity opinion, which invites a motion to limit the testimony
Valuing supervision in the plan and household services for overlapping hours
Applying one growth rate to every care category without explaining why
How should the economist answer a question about what the injured person can still do?
By identifying the medical or vocational finding the report relied on and stating that the economist priced it rather than formed it. The economist can explain how the result changes under a different capacity assumption, but the capacity opinion itself belongs to the experts who prepared it.
Should the economist's deposition follow the neuropsychologist's and the plan author's?
Yes. The economist's inputs come from those witnesses, and if their opinions shift at deposition the economic report changes with them. Scheduling the economist last lets the preparation session address the testimony actually given rather than the reports alone, and it keeps the economist from being asked to defend opinions that belong to others.
What reliance materials matter most in a brain injury case?
The work-capacity and neuropsychological opinions, the life care plan with its item-level tables, the family's documentation of supervision and household hours, and the school or earnings records behind the but-for path. Because the components must reconcile, the file should also include the economist's worksheet showing how plan hours and household services were separated. That worksheet answers the double-counting question before it is asked.
References
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (n.d.). Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS). U.S. Department of Labor. bls.gov
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (n.d.). Consumer Price Index: Medical care [Fact sheet]. U.S. Department of Labor. bls.gov