KW Economics prepares rebuttal analysis for traumatic brain injury cases venued in Louisiana: what the loss claim consists of, the records that drive it, and a present value built to Louisiana damages rules and venues. Plaintiff and defense.
Brain injury damages reports carry large figures that rest on two expert inputs, residual work capacity and the level of supervision, and the review tests whether the economic report applied those inputs faithfully or substituted its own. The economist checks the but-for earnings path for a young claimant against the educational and occupational evidence, the supervision hours and rates against the plan and the market, the life expectancy against the medical opinions, and the growth and discount rates for consistency, then shows the total under the alternative scenarios the record supports.
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.
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.
Louisiana courts ask the trial judge to act as gatekeeper for expert testimony, examining whether the economist is qualified, whether the method is reliable and accepted in the profession, and whether it was applied reliably to the facts of the case. An economic damages report answers those questions by tying each input to the record and citing its published sources.
Highest court: Louisiana Supreme Court. Court system: lasc.org.
Federal venues: Eastern District of Louisiana, Middle District of Louisiana, Western District of Louisiana.
Outside the civil courts, wage-loss disputes in workers' compensation matters proceed before the Louisiana Office of Workers' Compensation Administration.
Louisiana's civil code provides a survival action for the decedent's own damages and a separate wrongful death action for the designated beneficiaries' losses, both measured under a pure comparative fault system. The collateral source rule applies with exceptions the courts have carved out for amounts written off by providers, and judicial interest runs on tort awards from the date of judicial demand.
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.
Brain injury damages reports carry large figures that rest on two expert inputs, residual work capacity and the level of supervision, and the review tests whether the economic report applied those inputs faithfully or substituted its own. The economist checks the but-for earnings path for a young claimant against the educational and occupational evidence, the supervision hours and rates against the plan and the market, the life expectancy against the medical opinions, and the growth and discount rates for consistency, then shows the total under the alternative scenarios the record supports.
Louisiana courts ask the trial judge to act as gatekeeper for expert testimony, examining whether the economist is qualified, whether the method is reliable and accepted in the profession, and whether it was applied reliably to the facts of the case. An economic damages report answers those questions by tying each input to the record and citing its published sources. Traumatic Brain Injury cases venued in Louisiana are heard in the District Court (General jurisdiction; civil and criminal cases at the parish level), with final appeals to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Matters within federal jurisdiction proceed in the Eastern District of Louisiana, Middle District of Louisiana, and Western District of Louisiana.
Louisiana's civil code provides a survival action for the decedent's own damages and a separate wrongful death action for the designated beneficiaries' losses, both measured under a pure comparative fault system. The collateral source rule applies with exceptions the courts have carved out for amounts written off by providers, and judicial interest runs on tort awards from the date of judicial demand. The report presents past and future amounts separately, states every rate and table with its source, and shows the result under the alternatives the other side is likely to argue, so counsel can apply the Louisiana rules to a documented figure.
Request a consultation on Rebuttal or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.