In Quinonez v. Andersen, 144 Ariz. 193, 696 P.2d 1342 (App. 1984), the decedent's widower presented apparently uncontradicted expert testimony about economic loss he suffered from his wife's death. The Court nevertheless upheld the jury's award of zero damages because A.R.S. 12-613 "reserves to the jury the authority to award such damages as are 'fair and just'" and testimony about the Quinonezes' marriage could support the jury's conclusion that he had suffered no compensable loss "under all of the circumstances." 144 Ariz. at 198, 696 P.2d at 1347. The majority stretches the scant facts described in Quinonez when it suggests the mere reference to the children apparently being in the care of a relative at the time of trial refuted expert economic evidence on the loss of the wife. Further, although the majority notes the wife had stated she was planning to divorce her husband, it is equally notable she was killed "on her way to bail him out of jail." 144 Ariz. at 198, 696 P.2d at 1347.