In this personal injury case Dr. Steward provided a critique of the opposing economic expert’s report in which he attempts to estimate the economic damages to the plaintiff’s future earnings. The opposing expert’s economic damages are calculated by subtracting the plaintiff’s current projected lifetime earnings from his projected lifetime earnings had he not been injured. The opposing economic expert assumes that the plaintifff’s lifetime earnings have been damaged because he dropped out of high school because of the social stress of having a facial deformity from the injury. According to the opposing expert the plaintiff’s lack of a high school diploma reduces his future earnings by nearly 30%. The opposing expert also assumed that the plaintiff has suffered an additional 20% reduction in his projected lifetime earnings because his disability will increase his chance of being unemployed and reduce his earnings rate when employed. In his critique Dr. Steward points out that the opposing expert’s assumptions are unfounded unsupported and inflate the damages. He points out that the expert fails to provide reference to any data or employment studies that support his earnings reduction percentage. Additionally the plaintiff states in his deposition that he is working to earn his GED certificate; a fact that Dr. Steward points out the opposing expert failed to take into account.