Advertisement

Challenges in Valuing Loss of Services

  • Frank D. Tinari
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines five analytical challenges to the expert who undertakes a valuation of lost services: (1) establishing what types of services have been lost, (2) identifying which of these services are permitted by the courts to be valued, (3) determining the magnitude of each service, (4) determining a proper valuation method to apply to the identified services, and (5) specifying the monetary value of each service being measured. The types of services that could be considered are explained as the methods available for measuring both their quantity and monetary value. The paper also examines the joint production of services as well as their joint consumption. Readers will learn that valuation of lost services in personal litigation matters can range from the simple to the complex.

Keywords

Wage Rate Companionship Service Market Wage Healthy Life Expectancy Household Service 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Boss, P. (1999). A qualitative assessment of loss in the family system. Reading 24 in Ireland and Depperschmidt (1999), 289–301.Google Scholar
  2. Cushing, M. J., & Rosenbaum, D. I. (2012). Valuing household services: A new look at the replacement cost approach. Journal of Legal Economics, 19(1), 37–60.Google Scholar
  3. Dulaney, R. A., Fitzgerald, J. H., Swenson, M. S., & Wicks, J. H. (1992). Market valuation of household production. Journal of Forensic Economics, 5(2), 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Expectancy Data (2014). The bollar value of a day: 2013 dollar valuation. Shawnee: Shawnee Mission.Google Scholar
  5. Expectancy Data. (various). Healthy life expectancy. Shawnee: Shawnee Mission.Google Scholar
  6. Fischer, C. C. (1999). Measuring household production: Methodological considerations and current practice. Reading 15 in Ireland and Depperschmidt (1999), 171–190.Google Scholar
  7. Greenwood, D. T. (1996). Estimating hours of lost household production using time-use data: A caution. Litigation Economics Digest, 2(1), 89–91 [Editor’s Note: this journal is no longer published].Google Scholar
  8. Ireland, T. R. (1997). Compensable nonmarket services in wrongful death litigation: Legal definitions and measurement standards. Journal of Legal Economics, 7(2), 15–34.Google Scholar
  9. Ireland, T. R. (1999a). Compensable nonmarket services in wrongful death litigation: A conceptual evaluation based on legal standards. Reading 20 in Ireland and Depperschmidt (1999), 237–252.Google Scholar
  10. Ireland, T. R. (1999b). Opportunity cost versus replacement cost in a lost service analysis for a wrongful death action. Reading 6 in Ireland and Depperschmidt (1999), 55–64.Google Scholar
  11. Ireland, T. R. (2011a). Green v. Bittner and Progeny: Projecting dollar values for advice, counsel and companionship in New Jersey. Forensic Rehabilitation & Economics, 4(1), 99–106.Google Scholar
  12. Ireland, T. R. (2011b). Uses of the American Time Use Survey to measure household services: What works and does not work. Journal of Legal Economics, 18(1), 61–77.Google Scholar
  13. Ireland, T. R., & Depperschmidt, T. O. (Eds.) (1999). Assessing family loss in wrongful death litigation: The special roles of lost services and personal consumption. Tucson: Lawyers & Judges Publishing Co., Inc.Google Scholar
  14. Ireland, T. R., & Ward, J. O. (Eds.). (1999). Replacement cost valuation of production by homemakers: Conceptual questions and measurement problems. Reading 12 in Ireland and Depperschmidt (1999), 131–142.Google Scholar
  15. Kane, J., Spizman, L. M., Rodgers, J., & Gaskins, R. R. (2010). The effect of the loss of a parent on the future earnings of a minor child. Eastern Economic Journal, 36(3), 370–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Luthy, M. R., Brookshire, M. L., Rosenbaum, D., Schap, D., & Slesnick, F. L. (2015). A 2015 survey of forensic economists: Their methods, estimates, and perspectives. Journal of Forensic Economics, 26(1), 53–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin, G. D., & Weinstein, M. A. (2012). Determining economic damages. Costa Mesa: James Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
  18. Olson, G. W., & Rodgers, J. D. (1999). The problem of valuing emotional services: An analysis of legal and economic criteria. Reading 21 in Ireland and Depperschmidt (1999), 253–262.Google Scholar
  19. Slesnick, F. L., Luthy, M. R., & Brookshire, M. L. (2013). A 2012 survey of forensic economists: Their methods, estimates, and perspectives. Journal of Forensic Economics, 24(1), 67–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tinari, F. D. (1998). Household services: Toward a more comprehensive measure. Journal of Forensic Economics, 11(3), 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tinari, F. D. (2005). A note on household services: Toward a more comprehensive measurement. Journal of Forensic Economics, Fall 2004 (published December 2005), 17(3), 383–385.Google Scholar
  22. Tinari, F. D. (2011a). Comment on “Green v. Bittner and Progeny”. Forensic Rehabilitation and Economics, 4(2), 109–112.Google Scholar
  23. Tinari, F. D. (2011b). Comment on Smith, Smith & Uhl, “Estimating the value of family household management services: Approaches and markups”. Forensic Rehabilitation and Economics, 4(1), 33–36.Google Scholar
  24. Tinari, F. D., & Kucsma, K. K. (2012). Section 640: Companionship, advice, and counsel services, in Martin and Weinstein (2012).Google Scholar
  25. U.S. Department of Labor. (various years). American Time Use Survey. Washington, DC: Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.Google Scholar
  26. Ward, J. O., & Krueger, K. V. (1994). Establishing damages in catastrophic injury litigation. Tucson: Lawyers & Judges Publishing Co., Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Wyrick, T. L. (1993). The economic value of parental guidance. Journal of Legal Economics, 3(2), 81–94.Google Scholar

Cases

  1. Garza v. Berlanga, 598 S.W. 2d 377 (Tex. Civ. App.).Google Scholar
  2. Green v. Bittner, 81 N.J. 1; 424 A.2d 210, 1980.Google Scholar
  3. Michigan Central Railroad Company v. Vreeland, 227 U.S. 59, 1913.Google Scholar
  4. Wentling v. Medical Anesthesia Services, P.A., 701 P2d 939, Kan., 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank D. Tinari
    • 1
  1. 1.Seton Hall UniversityFlorham ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations