Drawing on roughly 45 years in the field, Gary Crakes explains how an economist enters a case only after doctors, life care planners, and employment records have done their part, then translates complex formulas into something a jury can follow. He walks through the difference between a wrongful death claim and a personal injury claim, and what happens to the numbers when a reduced life expectancy is involved.
The conversation digs into why state rules matter so much. Crakes describes how Connecticut requires reducing future losses to present value, while New York handles discounting differently after a verdict, using a real example Russ encountered in a cross-border case to make the point land.
There is also candid talk about credibility and method: keeping the same approach regardless of which side retains him, resisting a scorched-earth style, and leaning on Census Bureau data rather than assumptions about pedigree. Crakes shares his perspective on tough depositions, the gotcha questions he has learned to anticipate, and why, after five decades, he is still at it.
Listen for a clear, grounded look at a corner of litigation most people never see, and why the economics of injury are rarely as simple as they first appear.