Question

Multiple Choice Question:

Jennifer Jones, a 38-year-old employee at a metal fabricating plant, was injured in a work-related accident. She has not returned to work and her doctor states that she has permanent back injuries that preclude her from performing the job activities that were required of her at the metal fabricating plant and, in fact, her injuries made it impossible to work anywhere. Her employer claims that Jennifer's injury claims are grossly exaggerated and she could, in fact, return to work and perform her former job-related duties. Additionally, company management states that even if she could not return to her job at the metal fabricating plant, there are numerous minimum wage jobs that Jennifer could perform. In support of its claims, the company's personnel manager provided documents from Jennifer's file that showed she had missed work for alleged back problems on 12 occasions in the two years before the accident occurred. Before the accident, Jennifer Jones was earning $30,000 a year at her job, and the value of her fringe benefits the company provides was 30 percent of her wages. Her average work-related expenses (commuting, union dues, special clothing) average $4,200 per year. Jennifer indicated in her deposition testimony that absent the injury that occurred while at work, she planned to work until she was 65 years old. Jennifer also testified that she has been unable to perform about half of her household services since the accident.

In order to effectively defend his/her expert report during trial cross examination, the expert will need to:

	a.	Defend his/her assumptions on the severity of the work-related injury sustained by Jennifer.
	b.	Explain the basis of the opinions in this expert report and be ready to answer any questions about the impact of differing views of the severity of Jennifer's injuries on the calculation of damages.
	c.	Be able to explain away the company's personnel reports about the employee's missed work because of back problems.
	d.	Offer examples from other injury-related cases that parallel the current injury case and support the expert's opinion in the current case.

Answer 1

Answer is option B

B. Explain the basis of the opinions in this expert report and be ready to answer any questions about the impact of differing views of the severity of Jennifer's injuries on the calculation of damages.

The facts and assumptions on the basis of which opinion is derived should be stated in the report. The report should also include the methodology that has been used to derive a particular opinion should be included. Being highly technical, it demands an in-depth analysis to understand. Thus, it should be handled very sensitively.