Is there sufficient evidence to support a claim for lost income capacity damages in a case where the claim is for damages from a private practice that a plaintiff never opened?

For any measure of damages, "it is fundamental that 'damages which are speculative, remote, imaginary, contingent, or merely possible cannot serve as a legal basis for recovery. [Citations.]' " (Piscitelli v. Friedenberg (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 953, 989.) Consistent with this basic principle, the trial court instructed the jury that it could not "speculate or guess" in awarding damages. We are aware of no case in which a court has analyzed whether the evidence was sufficient to support lost income capacity damages in a case such as this one, where the claim is for damages from a private practice that a plaintiff never opened on account of alleged harm from being retaliated against. We look to guidance in similar contexts.