Rebuttal analysis applied to personal injury litigation: methodology, deliverables, and case-specific considerations.
In a personal injury matter the opposing economic report is tested on the inputs that move a lost earnings and damages figure: the earnings base and whether it matches the tax and wage records, the worklife expectancy and its source, the wage growth and discount rates and whether they were drawn on a consistent basis, the treatment of fringe benefits and household services, and whether the post-injury path reflects the work-capacity opinions in the record or an assumption. The economist ranks each finding by its effect on the total and, where counsel asks, recalculates the opposing model under corrected inputs to show what the number becomes.
Critique of an opposing economic damages, valuation, or forensic accounting report for plaintiff or defense counsel. The review tests the assumptions, data sources, discount rates, worklife and life expectancy inputs, growth rates, mitigation treatment, and arithmetic behind the opposing number, identifies the errors that matter, and quantifies how the conclusion changes when they are corrected. The result supports cross-examination, a rebuttal report, or a motion directed at the reliability of the opinion.
The claim typically consists of past lost earnings from the date of injury to the date of analysis, future lost earnings or reduced earning capacity across the person's expected worklife, lost fringe benefits such as employer retirement contributions and health insurance, the replacement cost of household services the person can no longer perform, and the present value of future medical and care costs when a life care plan or treating recommendations exist. The records that drive the number are tax returns, W-2s and pay stubs, personnel and union files, benefit plan documents, and the medical or work-capacity opinions that define what the person can do after the injury.
We issue a rebuttal report where one is disclosed and provide deposition and trial testimony, cross-examination outlines, and support for motions directed at the opinion.
An earnings base that does not match the records, a worklife or retirement assumption without record support, growth and discount rates drawn on inconsistent bases, fringe benefits valued at a rate the plan documents do not support, and a post-injury path that ignores or overstates the work-capacity opinions. The review checks each and states its effect.
Yes. The opposing model is recalculated under corrected inputs, one at a time and together, so the fact finder can see what each correction does. The result can remain consulting work or be disclosed as a rebuttal report.
Request a consultation on Rebuttal or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.