In this case Dr. Steward provides a critique of the analysis by the opposing economist and analysis of the plaintiff’s economic damages. The plaintiff, a citizen of Mexico, was injured while working as a tree trimmer in the U.S. The opposing economic expert analyses significantly overstated the alleged economic losses in this case by using unrealistic work life assumption and substantially overstates the amount that plaintiff would have been capable of earning in the U.S. had he not been injured. After working in the U.S. for a period of time, the plaintiff would have returned to Mexico and worked the remainder of his expected work life in Mexico. According to the data on Mexican migrant workers in the U.S., the plaintiff could be expected to work approximately 6.1 years of his total work life in the U.S. had he not been injured. For the time period the plaintiff was projected to work in the U.S., his non-injury earnings capacity is based on his historical earnings as a tree trimmer. For the time period that he is projected to work in Mexico, his non-injury earnings capacity is based on Mexican earnings profiles. The present values of the plaintiff’s earnings were derived by downwardly adjusting the annual earnings amount by an interest rate discount factor. The interest rate factor is based on the current yield from U.S. Treasury Securities. Dr. Steward calculated the present value of plaintiff’s earnings using Mexican interest rate discount factors.