KW Economics prepares lost earnings analysis for product liability cases venued in Massachusetts: what the loss claim consists of, the records that drive it, and a present value built to Massachusetts damages rules and venues. Plaintiff and defense.
Product liability claims often involve an injured person whose exposure to the product bears no relation to their occupation, so the lost earnings analysis is built from that person's own path rather than from the circumstances of the injury. The economist establishes the but-for earnings base from the earnings history or, for a child, student, or homemaker, from the educational path and occupational earnings data, projects it over the applicable worklife with growth, and sets against it the post-injury path the work-capacity opinions support. In a mass tort setting the same documented method is applied to each claimant's own records so results are consistent in method and individual in result.
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.
The exposure tracks the injury: burns, amputations, and neurological injuries produce large future earnings and care losses; less severe injuries produce a bounded past loss and limited future treatment. Because product cases often involve children, homemakers, and retirees, the household services and care components frequently outweigh the earnings loss, and the analysis must be built from those components rather than from wage records that do not exist. For fatal injuries the exposure follows the wrongful death structure with the personal consumption deduction as the key assumption.
Massachusetts courts ask whether the reasoning and methodology behind an expert opinion are reliable, which can be shown either by general acceptance in the profession or by the reliability factors the federal courts use, and whether the witness is qualified by training and experience. Forensic economic methods satisfy that inquiry through their published literature, so the examination usually turns on the inputs and their support in the record.
Highest court: Supreme Judicial Court. Court system: mass.gov.
Federal venues: District of Massachusetts.
Outside the civil courts, wage-loss disputes in workers' compensation matters proceed before the Massachusetts Department of Industrial Accidents.
Massachusetts measures wrongful death by the fair monetary value of the decedent to the beneficiaries, including lost income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, and companionship, and permits punitive damages for gross negligence, with the decedent's own conscious suffering recovered by the estate. Recovery is barred once the plaintiff's fault exceeds the combined fault of the defendants, the common-law collateral source rule applies outside medical malpractice, and prejudgment interest on tort awards runs from the commencement of the action.
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.
Product liability claims often involve an injured person whose exposure to the product bears no relation to their occupation, so the lost earnings analysis is built from that person's own path rather than from the circumstances of the injury. The economist establishes the but-for earnings base from the earnings history or, for a child, student, or homemaker, from the educational path and occupational earnings data, projects it over the applicable worklife with growth, and sets against it the post-injury path the work-capacity opinions support. In a mass tort setting the same documented method is applied to each claimant's own records so results are consistent in method and individual in result.
Massachusetts courts ask whether the reasoning and methodology behind an expert opinion are reliable, which can be shown either by general acceptance in the profession or by the reliability factors the federal courts use, and whether the witness is qualified by training and experience. Forensic economic methods satisfy that inquiry through their published literature, so the examination usually turns on the inputs and their support in the record. Product Liability cases venued in Massachusetts are heard in the Superior Court (General jurisdiction; larger civil cases, major criminal cases), with final appeals to the Supreme Judicial Court. Matters within federal jurisdiction proceed in the District of Massachusetts.
Massachusetts measures wrongful death by the fair monetary value of the decedent to the beneficiaries, including lost income, services, protection, care, assistance, society, and companionship, and permits punitive damages for gross negligence, with the decedent's own conscious suffering recovered by the estate. Recovery is barred once the plaintiff's fault exceeds the combined fault of the defendants, the common-law collateral source rule applies outside medical malpractice, and prejudgment interest on tort awards runs from the commencement of the action. 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 Massachusetts rules to a documented figure.
Request a consultation on Lost Earnings or call (201) 343-0700. Plaintiff and defense counsel.