Two Myths Exposed: Why Losses Don’t Go On Forever and Why Plaintiffs Actually Should Find Employment
9 October 1995
By Dr. Christopher Erath
In employment discrimination litigation, plaintiffs' damage estimates often seem absurdly high to those involved in the case but are easily rationalized to a jury. This is probably a consequence of two facts: first, since plaintiffs prevail in a large percentage of employment discrimination cases that go to trial, they have an incentive to ask for as large a damage figure as possible; and second, many plaintiffs' experts use simple models to project damages that only require a few pieces of information as inputs. Such experts can produce a damage report seconds after learning only the plaintiff's age, salary at termination, and current earnings. In this NERA brief, Senior Vice President Dr. Christopher Erath discusses the best way to limit plaintiffs' damages claims: by making arguments base on the principles of specificity and reasonability. In his analysis, Dr. Erath focuses on how to consider the question of the duration of economic loss and whether a plaintiff’s posttermination earnings are reasonable.
