Traumatic brain injury matters carry some of the largest economic claims in personal injury litigation because cognitive and behavioral effects can end a career even when physical function returns. The economist's task is to measure the earnings, benefits, and household contributions the injury has taken away and to reduce the care costs in the life care plan to present value, with every assumption stated so it can be tested.
In short
The claim consists of lost earnings and earning capacity, often a total loss when the person cannot return to competitive work or a partial loss when they can work only with supports or at a lower level; lost fringe benefits; the replacement cost of household services, including the supervision and management of daily affairs that family members now provide; and the present value of the care plan, which in serious injury includes attendant care, therapy, medication, and case management over a lifetime. The drivers are the earnings history, the neuropsychological and work-capacity opinions in the record, and a life care plan that specifies each item's frequency and duration.
Two components usually dominate: future lost earnings across a long worklife for a young person, and the present value of attendant care and supervision when the plan calls for daily hours of paid help. Because the level of supervision and the person's residual work capacity are both matters of expert opinion, the report's total is highly sensitive to those inputs, and the life expectancy used for the care stream is a second source of dispute. Mild injury with persistent symptoms presents a narrower claim built on reduced hours, lost advancement, and periodic treatment.
The economist establishes the but-for earnings path from the person's history and, for a young person, from occupational data for the path they were on, and projects it over a worklife expectancy with wage growth. The post-injury path is drawn from actual earnings and the work-capacity opinions in the record, and the difference is the earnings loss. Household services and family supervision are valued from time-use data and local rates for the level of service involved, and the life care plan is priced item by item with medical cost growth over the horizon the medical evidence supports. All future streams are discounted to present value, and the report shows the total under alternative supervision and work-capacity scenarios so the fact finder can match the number to its findings.
Stage-by-stage guidance on working with a forensic economist in traumatic brain injury litigation.
Yes. Many people with brain injury return to work but at reduced hours, in a lower position, or with supports that will not last. The economist compares the but-for path with the actual post-injury path and measures the gap, including lost advancement and benefits, over the remaining worklife.
By the hours of supervision or assistance the record supports and the local market rate for the level of service a paid provider would charge, from companion care to skilled attendant care. The economist states the hours, the rate, and the source so the value can be examined.
Each item's description, frequency, duration, start and end ages, and current unit cost. The economist applies the appropriate cost growth to each category and discounts the stream to present value. Items with a range of frequencies are shown at each end of the range.
It sets the horizon for the care stream and for household services. The economist uses the life expectancy the medical evidence supports and, where physicians disagree, presents the present value under each so the finding drives the number.
The earnings base is projected from the educational path the child was on and occupational earnings data for that path, since there is no work history. The report states the education level assumed and shows how the result changes if a different level is used.
Request a consultation on traumatic brain injury cases or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.