# California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) (2017)

## 3904b. Use of Present-Value Tables

Download PDF3904B.Use of Present-Value Tables

[For Table A:]

[Use Worksheet A and Table A to compute the present value of [specify

future damages that can be expressed as a regular dollar amount over a

determinable period of time, e.g., lost future income or the cost of

permanent medical care].

1. Determine the amount of [name of plaintiff]’s future loss for [e.g.,

lost income] each year. Enter this amount into Worksheet A, Step

1.

2. Determine the number of years that this loss will continue. Enter

this amount into Worksheet A, Step 2.

3. Select the interest rate that you decide [based on the expert

testimony that you have heard] represents the most likely rate of

return on money invested today over that period of years. Enter

this amount into Worksheet A, Step 3.

4. Select the appropriate Present Value Factor from Table A. To

locate this factor, use the Number of Years from Step 2 on the

worksheet and the Interest Rate from Step 3 on the worksheet

and fin the number that is the intersection of the Interest Rate

column and Number of Years row. (For example, if the number

of years is 15 and the interest rate is 10 percent, the

corresponding Present Value Factor is 7.61.) Enter the factor

into Worksheet A, Step 4.

5. Multiply the amount of [name of plaintiff]’s annual future loss

from Step 1 by the factor from Step 4. This is the present value

of [name of plaintiff]’s total future loss for [e.g., lost income].

Enter this amount into Worksheet A, Step 5.

WORKSHEET A

Step 1: Repeating identical annual

dollar amount of future loss:$

Step 2: Number of years that this

loss will continue:

Step 3: Interest rate that represents

a reasonable rate of return

on money invested today

over that period of years: %

Step 4: Present Value Factor from

Table A:

747

0049

Step 5: Amount from Step 1 times

Factor from Step 4: $

Enter the amount from Step 5 on your verdict form as [name of

plaintiff]’s total future economic loss for [e.g., lost income].]

[For Table B:]

[Use Worksheet B and Table B to compute the present value of [specify

future damages that cannot be expressed as a repeating identical dollar

amount over a determinable period of time, e.g., future surgeries].

1. Determine the future years in which a future loss will occur. In

Column A, starting with the current year, enter each year

through the last year that you determined a future loss will

occur.

2. Determine the amount of [name of plaintiff]’s future loss for [e.g.,

future surgeries] for each year that you determine the loss will

occur. Enter these future losses in Column B on the worksheet.

Enter $0 if no future loss occurs in a given year.

3. Select the interest rate that you decide [based on the expert

testimony that you have heard] represents a reasonable rate of

return on money invested today over the number of years

determined in Step 2. Enter this rate in Column C on the

worksheet for each year that future-loss amounts are entered in

Column B.

4. Select the appropriate Present Value Factor from Table B for

each year for which you have determined that a loss will occur.

To locate this factor, use the Number of Years from Column A

on the worksheet and the Interest Rate in Column C on the

worksheet and fin the number that is the intersection of the

Interest Rate column and Number of Years row from the table.

(For example, for year 15, if the interest rate is 10 percent, the

corresponding Present Value Factor is 0.239.) Enter the

appropriate Present Value Factors in Column D. For the current

year, the Present Value Factor is 1.000. It is not necessary to

select an interest rate for the current year in Step 3.

5. Multiply the amount in Column B by the factor in Column D for

each year for which you determined that a loss will occur and

enter these amounts in Column E.

6. Add all of the entries in Column E and enter this sum into Total

Present Value of Future Loss.

Enter the amount from Step 6 on your verdict form as [name of

plaintiff]’s total future economic loss for [e.g., future surgeries].]

CACI No. 3904B DAMAGES

748

0050

WORKSHEET B

A B C D E

Year Dollar Amount

of Future Loss

Each Year

Interest

Rate

Present Value

Factor

Present

Value of

Future Loss

Current year

(20___)

$ Not

applicable

1.000 $

Year 1 (20___) $ % $

Year 2 (20___) $ % $

Year 3 (20___) $ % $

Year 4 (20___) $ % $

Year 5 (20___) $ % $

Year 6 (20___) $ % $

Year 7 (20___) $ % $

Year 8 (20___) $ % $

Year 9 (20___) $ % $

Year 10 (20___) $ % $

Year 11 (20___) $ % $

Year 12 (20___) $ % $

Year 13 (20___) $ % $

Year 14 (20___) $ % $

Year 15 (20___) $ % $

Year 16 (20___) $ % $

Year 17 (20___) $ % $

Year 18 (20___) $ % $

Year 19 (20___) $ % $

Year 20 (20___) $ % $

Year 21 (20___) $ % $

Year 22 (20___) $ % $

Year 23 (20___) $ % $

Year 24 (20___) $ % $

Year 25 (20___) $ % $

Total Present Value of Future Loss (add all amounts in Column

E)

$

DAMAGES CACI No. 3904B

749

0051

New December 2010

Directions for Use

Give this instruction if one of the accompanying tables is to be given to the jury.

Also give CACI No. 359, Present Cash Value of Future Damages, in a contract

action, or CACI No. 3904A, Present Cash Value, in a tort action.

Use Worksheet A and Table A if future economic loss will occur over multiple

years and the amount of the loss will be the same every year. For example, lost

future income may be capable of being expressed in a fixe annual dollar figure

Similarly, the cost of future medical care may be reduced to present value under

Table A if it will be a regular amount over a determinable period of time.

Use Worksheet B and Table B in all other instances of future economic loss. In

some cases, it may be necessary to give the jury both worksheets and tables if

there are categories of both regular recurring future economic loss and irregular or

varying loss.

The interest rate to be used in the tables must be established by stipulation or by

the evidence. Expert testimony will usually be required to accurately establish

present values for future economic losses. It would appear that because reduction to

present value benefit the defendant, the defendant bears the burden of proof on the

discount rate. (See Wilson v. Gilbert (1972) 25 Cal.App.3d 607, 613–614 [102

Cal.Rptr. 31] [no error to refuse instruction on reduction to present value when

defendant presented no evidence].)

Tables should not be used for future noneconomic damages. (See Salgado v.

County of L.A. (1998) 19 Cal.4th 629, 646–647 [80 Cal.Rptr.2d 46, 967 P.2d 585];

CACI No. 3904A, Present Cash Value.)

Sources and Authority

• “Neither party introduced any evidence of compounding or discounting factors,

including how to calculate an appropriate rate of return throughout the relevant

years. Under such circumstances, the ‘jury would have been put to sheer

speculation in determining . . . “the present sum of money which . . . will pay

to the plaintiff . . . the equivalent of his [future economic] loss . . . .” ’ ”

(Schiernbeck v. Haight (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 869, 877 [9 Cal.Rptr.2d 716],

internal citations omitted.)

• “[W]e cannot presume that the jurors were unable to make the various

computations without the proffered aid of court and counsel after firs reaching

necessary agreement on the various determinables comprising the formula.

Further, defendant’s counsel took a calculated risk in this regard; he produced

neither statistician nor economist to aid his cause in this regard. Too, we have

found no California cases which hold that use of the present table is

indispensable to a proper award of damages for loss of future earning capacity

. . . .” (Howard v. Global Marine, Inc. (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 809, 816 [105

Cal.Rptr. 50].)

• “The trial court was also correct in refusing the proposed instruction, on its

CACI No. 3904B DAMAGES

750

0052

merits, for lack of evidence which would have supported a jury findin of the

‘present cash value’ of any sum assessed as the value of [plaintiff]’s future

earning capacity . . . . The computation of such ‘present cash value’ is ‘difficult

and confusing . . . to present to a jury’ and, in the pertinent cases, the

computation was apparently reached by the respective juries upon the basis of

real evidence. Absent such evidence in the present case (and there was none),

this jury would have been put to sheer speculation in determining (as the

proposed instruction would have had it do) ‘the present sum of money which,

together with interest thereon when invested so as to yield the highest rate of

interest consistent with reasonable security, will pay to the plaintiff . . . the

equivalent of his loss of earning capacity . . . in the future . . . .’ The

instruction would have required the jury to reach this result without the benefi

of evidence or advice as to the complicated factors of compounding and

discounting which the instruction necessarily involved. There are ‘present cash

value’ tables which might have assisted the jury in this regard, if judicially

noticed for instruction purposes, but the proposed instruction included no

reference to them. For these reasons, and on the instruction’s merits, the trial

court did not err in refusing to give it.” (Wilson, supra, 25 Cal.App.3d at pp.

613–614, internal citations omitted.)

• “Anticipated future increases of medical costs may be presented to the jury.

Expert testimony may be used with regard to a ‘subject that is sufficiently

beyond common experience that the opinion of an expert would assist the trier

of fact; . . .’ Future medical expenses are such a subject. Testimony by

actuaries is frequently used to show discount rates and the present value of

future benefits [¶] The expert testimony was substantial evidence supporting the

portion of the award relating to the future cost of attendant care. The substantial

evidence test is applied in view of the entire record; other than a vigorous

cross-examination of plaintiffs’ expert, appellants presented no evidence on the

cost of attendant care. The elaborate economic arguments presented in the briefs

of appellants and amicus curiae might better have been presented to the jury in

opposition to respondents’ expert testimony.” (Niles v. City of San Rafael (1974)

42 Cal.App.3d 230, 243 [116 Cal.Rptr. 733], internal citations omitted.)

• “Appellants claim that the 5 percent discount rate presented by the expert was

too low. A discount rate, similar to an interest rate, is used to determine the

present value of future expenses. The expert, in arriving at a 5 percent rate,

used commercial investment studies pertaining to the riskiness of corporate

bonds, charts compiled by the Federal Reserve System showing interest yields

on various bonds since 1920, and tables published by the United States Savings

and Loan League showing interest rates on savings accounts since 1929. He

took into account the need for reasonable security of investment over the period

of [plaintiff]’s life. All of this was apparently within the competence of the

expert.” (Niles, supra, 42 Cal.App.3d at pp. 243–244.)

Secondary Sources

6 Witkin, Summary of California Law (10th ed. 2005) Torts, § 1552

DAMAGES CACI No. 3904B

751

0053

California Tort Damages (Cont.Ed.Bar) Bodily Injury, § 1.96

4 Levy et al., California Torts, Ch. 52, Medical Expenses and Economic Loss,

§§ 52.21, 52.22 (Matthew Bender)

15 California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 177, Damages, § 177.46

(Matthew Bender)

6 California Points and Authorities, Ch. 64, Damages: Tort, § 64.40 et seq.

(Matthew Bender)

CACI No. 3904B DAMAGES

752

0054

DAMAGES CACI No. 3904B

753

0055

CACI No. 3904B DAMAGES

754

0056