Oregon law has allowed injured employees who are “employed at a fixed wage” to recover their “lost wages” as damages, and Oregon law has allowed an injured victim to recover compensation for the “impairment of [their] earning capacity.”
How later courts described this case
- Oregon law has allowed injured employees who are “employed at a fixed wage” to recover their “lost wages” as damages, and Oregon law has allowed an injured victim to recover compensation for the “impairment of [their] earning capacity.”
- in a personal injury case, evidence required to support a claim for impaired earning capacity need not be “capable of exact monetary computation”; any evidence that “indicate [s] fairly the capacity of the plaintiff to earn money in his usual vocation should be admitted”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BRYSON, J.,
concurring in part; dissenting in part.
I concur in that part of the majority opinion which holds:
“# * * [I] f plaintiff * * * was not employed at a fixed wage, he may plead in general terms that as a result of the injury his earning capacity has been impaired * * * and any such recovery would then necessarily be included in the damages claimed by him. * * *”
This is in accord with the majority opinion in Baxter v. Baker, 253 Or 376 , 451 P2d 456 , 454 P2d 855 (1969).
I dissent from that part of the majority opinion which states:
“* * * If a plaintiff was employed at a fixed wage and claims to have suffered lost wages he may still plead the amount of the claimed wage loss, as under present practice. Similarly, a plaintiff who has incurred medical expenses may still plead the amount of such expenses. On the other hand, if plaintiff chooses not to do so, * # * he *71 may plead in general terms that as a result of the injury his earning capacity has been impaired or that he has incurred medical expenses, in unstated amounts, and any such recovery would then necessarily be included in the damages claimed by him. * * *” (Emphasis supplied.)
If plaintiff is employed and claims lost wages or medical expenses he should be required to plead his lost wages and medical expenses to time of trial. The plaintiff always has his right to amend the complaint to conform to the evidence before the case is submitted to the jury. Quirk v. Ross, 257 Or 80, 83 , 476 P2d 559 (1970).
The majority opinion says the plaintiff is not required to so plead but he may plead such losses.
Oregon’s civil procedure practice does not provide for a pretrial order to settle these matters. At some time prior to instructing the jury, the trial court, in the case of an employed plaintiff, is going to have to determine the amount of plaintiff’s lost wages and medical expenses that are supported by substantial evidence. If there is no such evidence to support such losses, I assume the matter will not be submitted to the jury.
In short, I believe this part of the majority opinion will create confusion for the Bar and the trial judges. It is the fundamental desire of courts and responsible counsel to encourage and seek settlement of cases. The pleading of lost wages and medical expenses to the time of trial has made settlement more attainable without prolonged discovery proceedings. We should not deviate from a pleading and procedural practice that has obtained admirable results in our trial courts.