Personal Injury: Economist at Trial

By Christopher Skerritt, M.Ed., MBA, Chief of Economic Services · Published · Reviewed

Trial testimony in a personal injury matter has three jobs: to show the jury what the loss consists of, component by component; to explain present value in plain terms so the jury understands why a future loss is stated as a smaller number today; and to answer the opposing economist's report point by point. Demonstratives should follow the report's structure, from the earnings base to the post-injury path to the present value of each component, and every figure on a board should be traceable to a table in the report. Counsel should plan the direct examination so the assumptions the opposing side will attack are explained before cross rather than after.

Checklist

  1. Prepare demonstratives showing the but-for path, the post-injury path, and the gap between them by year
  2. Prepare a plain-language present value explanation with a simple example the jury can follow
  3. Prepare a side-by-side of the two economists' assumptions and the effect of each difference
  4. Rehearse direct examination on the assumptions most likely to be attacked on cross
  5. Confirm every number on a demonstrative ties to a table in the report

Questions to ask the economist

Timeline

One to two preparation sessions in the week before testimony, after the demonstratives are drafted and the opposing report has been analyzed.

Required documents

Common pitfalls

Frequently Asked Questions

How does the economist explain present value to a jury?

As the amount that, invested today at a stated rate, would grow to cover each year's loss as it comes due. A short example with a single future payment shows the idea, and the report's year-by-year table shows how the same arithmetic produces the total. The explanation is the same whether the number is large or small.

In what order should the economist testify?

After the medical and work-capacity witnesses whose opinions define the post-injury path and, where a life care plan is claimed, after its author. That sequence puts the economist's inputs in evidence before the valuation is presented and keeps the economist from being asked to defend opinions that belong to others. Counsel should tell the economist which of those witnesses have testified and what they said.

How does the economist handle a cross-examination question about being paid by one side?

By stating the fee arrangement plainly: hourly, not contingent on the outcome, and the same method regardless of who retained the economist. The report's stated sources and sensitivity tables are the evidence of that, because they let the opposing side check every number. The question loses force when the economist has already shown the result under the other side's assumptions.

References

Request a consultation on Personal Injury or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.