KW Economics prepares lost earnings analysis for medical malpractice cases venued in Wisconsin: what the loss claim consists of, the records that drive it, and a present value built to Wisconsin damages rules and venues. Plaintiff and defense.
In a medical malpractice matter the lost earnings claim is measured against the outcome the patient would have had with proper care, not against perfect health. The economist takes the causation and prognosis opinions in the record as the baseline, states the but-for earnings path they support, and builds the injured path from actual post-injury earnings and the work-capacity opinions. The loss is the difference between the two paths, projected over the applicable worklife with growth and discounted to present value. Where the underlying condition would have limited work on its own, the apportionment between the injury and the condition is usually the assumption that most changes the total.
Past and future lost earnings and fringe benefits for a person whose injury has removed them from work or reduced what they can earn. The analysis builds from the earnings history, projects the but-for path over the person's expected worklife with wage growth, and discounts the future stream to present value. When the person can still work in a reduced capacity, the loss is framed as diminished earning capacity, with the post-injury path drawn from a vocational opinion or the treating record and offset against the but-for projection.
Because the underlying condition often affected work capacity or life expectancy on its own, the apportionment between the injury and the pre-existing condition is usually the most contested assumption and the one that most changes the total. In cases of permanent disability the incremental care costs and the earnings loss are both large and run across a long horizon, and the life expectancy used for each stream is a second point of contention. In delayed-diagnosis cases the loss may be measured as the difference between two outcome paths, each with its own earnings and care profile.
Wisconsin courts screen expert testimony for reliability: the judge asks whether the economist is qualified, whether the opinion rests on sufficient facts and reliable principles and methods, and whether those methods were reliably applied to the case. An economic damages report is written to that inquiry, with each rate and table traced to a published source.
Highest court: Wisconsin Supreme Court. Court system: wicourts.gov.
Federal venues: Eastern District of Wisconsin, Western District of Wisconsin.
Outside the civil courts, wage-loss disputes in workers' compensation matters proceed before the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Worker's Compensation Division.
Wisconsin pairs a wrongful death action for the beneficiaries' pecuniary injury and a limited allowance for loss of society and companionship with a survival action for the decedent's own claims. Recovery is barred once the plaintiff's fault exceeds the defendant's, the common-law collateral source rule applies outside medical malpractice where evidence of collateral payments is admissible, statutory limits apply to noneconomic damages in medical malpractice claims, and interest on a verdict that beats a rejected statutory offer of settlement runs from the date of the offer.
We issue the final report in disclosure-ready form and provide deposition and trial testimony, rebuttal of opposing economic opinions, and updated calculations as new records arrive.
In a medical malpractice matter the lost earnings claim is measured against the outcome the patient would have had with proper care, not against perfect health. The economist takes the causation and prognosis opinions in the record as the baseline, states the but-for earnings path they support, and builds the injured path from actual post-injury earnings and the work-capacity opinions. The loss is the difference between the two paths, projected over the applicable worklife with growth and discounted to present value. Where the underlying condition would have limited work on its own, the apportionment between the injury and the condition is usually the assumption that most changes the total.
Wisconsin courts screen expert testimony for reliability: the judge asks whether the economist is qualified, whether the opinion rests on sufficient facts and reliable principles and methods, and whether those methods were reliably applied to the case. An economic damages report is written to that inquiry, with each rate and table traced to a published source. Medical Malpractice cases venued in Wisconsin are heard in the Circuit Court (General jurisdiction; one in each of 72 counties; all civil, criminal, family, and probate matters), with final appeals to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Matters within federal jurisdiction proceed in the Eastern District of Wisconsin and Western District of Wisconsin.
Wisconsin pairs a wrongful death action for the beneficiaries' pecuniary injury and a limited allowance for loss of society and companionship with a survival action for the decedent's own claims. Recovery is barred once the plaintiff's fault exceeds the defendant's, the common-law collateral source rule applies outside medical malpractice where evidence of collateral payments is admissible, statutory limits apply to noneconomic damages in medical malpractice claims, and interest on a verdict that beats a rejected statutory offer of settlement runs from the date of the offer. 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 Wisconsin rules to a documented figure.
Request a consultation on Lost Earnings or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.