Originally, the lower court held that Ms. Fecke's ability to make money in the future, or her future earnings, were affected. However, the appeals court ruled that it was actually his future earning capacity that was compromised. This was an important distinction since Ms. Fecke was an unemployed college student and in most cases future earnings are based on the profession the plaintiff originally pursued and how that would affect his earnings in that field. This case sets a precedent for college students without current jobs, as all damages in this context will be for loss of future earning capacity rather than loss of future earning capacity.