Clifford Gowdy is permanently injured. The plaintiff has established a reasonable degree of probability that future damages will occur. Kellom v. City of Ecorse, 329 Mich. 303, 45 NW. 2d 293 (1551); In re Boyer's Estate, 282 Mich, 552, 276 N.W. 552 (1937), approving Brininstool v. Michigan United Ry. Co., 157 Mich. 172, 121 N.W. 728 (1909). These future damages are pain and suffering, impairment of earning capacity, and loss of physical power, vitality and capacity to enjoy the normal physical activities of life. Gilson v. Bronkhorst, 353 Mich. 148, 90 N.W. 2d 7013 (1958); Howell v. Lansing City Electric R. Co., 136 Mich. 432, 99 N.W. 406 (1904); De May v. Roberts, 46 Mich. 160, 9 N.W. 146 (1881). Future damages are under Michigan law to be reduced to the present worth. Document No. 133 of "Desk Book," American Jurisprudence 2d, specifies the present value of a dollar per year for a number of years in the future. Plaintiff has introduced "Vital Statistics of the United States, 1963, Life Tables,” Vol. 2 $5, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare, Table 5-1, p. 5-7. This document is judicially noticed for all purposes in connection with future damages and life expectancy of the plaintiff. Gowdy was born June 13, 1924, and the table shows a life expectancy of 32.1 years. Gowdy has been receiving disability payments from collateral sources, such as benefits under the Social Security Act, and the Michigan Workmen's Compensation Act. His medical and hospital expenses were paid by the insurance compensation carrier of his employer, Whittaker Electric Company. Collateral source compensation does not operate to lessen the damages recoverable by an injured person from a wrongdoer. 15 Am. Jur.. Damages, § 198; Lebel v. Swincicki, 354 Mich. 427, 93 N.W. 2d 281 (1958); Kurta v. Probelske, 324 Mich. 179, 36 N.W. 2d 889 (1949); Cawood v. Earl Paige & Co., 239 Mich. 483, 214 N.W. 402 (1927); Mazzolini v. County of Kalamazoo, 228 Mich, 59, 199 N.W. 648 (1924). A wrongdoer takes the injured person as he finds him, and if his wrongful conduct results in aggravation of latent previous conditions of disability or pain, the defendant is liable for aggravation as well as that which originates from the injuries the plaintiff sustained. Gowdy had a congenital anomaly of his lumbar spine which predisposed hin. to low back injury, and by reason of his psychiatric structure he was susceptible to grave emotional difficulties as a result of physical or mental stress. These were aggravated by his fall on August 23, 1963. Defendant is liable for the aggravation of these conditions. Royer v. Eskovitz, 358 Mich. 279, 100 N.W. 2d 306 (1960); Beauerle v. Michigan Central R. Co., 152 Mich. 345, 116 N.W. 424 (1908): Hall v. City of Cadillac, 114 Mich, 99, 72 N.W. 33 (1897); increased susceptibility to pain; Schwingschlegl v. City of Monroe, 113 Mich, 683, 72 N.W. 7 (1897); Wilkinson v. Steel & Spring Works, 73 Mich. 405, 41 N. W. 490 (1889). FINDINGS OF FACT AND LAW ON SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF DAMAGE Medical Expenses Gowdy is entitled to compensation for all of the reasonable medical expenses which were incurred for proper examination, diagnosis or treatment of the injuries sustained by him, or for relief of pain and discomfort resulting from his injuries. Abbott v. City of Detroit, 150 Mich. 245, 113 N.W. 1121 (1907); Sherwood v. Railway Co., 82 Mich. 374, 46 N.W. 773 (1890), approving Power v. Harlow, 57 Mich. 107, 23 N.W. 606; Geveke v. G. Rap. & Ind. R. Co., 57 Mich. 589, 24 N.W. 675 (1885). Defendant has admitted that plaintiff's medical expenses set forth in plaintiff's exhibits 19-32(e) are fair and reasonable. A summary of these damages follows: >ther medical expenses: 6 "Blue Bill" statements for shoes and wedges. Hammer Drugstore-- Balbirnie-Apostle Mortuary ambulance service.. 5 "Blue Bills," expense of transporting Gowdy from Mears to Total Additional medical expenses in connection with severe back complaint : September 1965 to November 1966, inpatient care Plainwell Sanitarium: Oceana Hospital___. Dr. Edwin Williamson_. Total $106. 79 40.00 16.33 72.00 288.62 2, 285. 74 170.85 150.00 234.00 554.85 Dr. Robert Jarka recommended a triple arthrodesis to the left foot to relieve severe pain and discomfort. We find a total of $1,000 represents a reasonable adjustment for estimated surgical fees of $200-$225, and a hospitalization period followed by physiotherapy. Physical and mental pain and suffering Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for past and future pain and suffering. Howell v. Lansing City Electric R. Co., supra; Brown v. Oestman, 362 Mich. 614, 107 N.W. 2d 837 (1961). In addition to physical pain and suffering, plaintiff is entitled to compensation for mental pain or discomforts, which includes anxiety, suspense and fright resulting from the injuries he sustained, as well as personal anguish or mental distress he experienced or will experience because of his multiple disabilities. Sherwood v. Railway Co., supra; Abbott v. City of Detroit, supra. For the first two years, from August 23, 1963 to August 23, 1965, a period of 104 weeks, plaintiff endured great pain and discomfort. This is substantiated by the testimony of his physicians. During this period his pain was acute except for occasional remissive stages of less intense pain. An os calcis injury of the character incurred by the plaintiff is accompanied with a persistence of pain and complaints, even though medically satisfactory mechanical results may be achieved through orthopedic treatment. Gowdy experiences some degree of pain during all of his waking hours, which is intensified with increased physical activities such as walking, standing or any variation in gait or movement. The medical testimony establishes a real probability of a continuance of this pain and suffering into the future. His injuries and pain and suffering in this respect are permanent. Dr. Emil J. Lauretti, a physician and surgeon who has practiced traumatic and industrial surgery and medicine since 1934, observed that in cases involving fractured heels, patients usually do have many complaints and most of them complain of severe pain. He said: “* ** anybody that has fractured heels have a bad disability. *** As I say when you have two heel bones fractured, it's really a terrible disability." (Deposition of Dr. Lauretti, pp. 44-5.) (Emphasis supplied.) Dr. Giese, a specialist in orthopedic surgery, concluded ***** there will probably be very little improvement as far as pain is concerned, that in all probability he will continue to have substantial amounts of discomfort in both feet." (Deposition of Dr. Giese, p. 42.) Plaintiff should be awarded $130 per week for the first two years of the period of his injuries. He is entitled to receive $100 per week for 70 weeks, August 23, 1965 to December 22, 1966, date of trial. We evaluate his future pain and suffering for the period of his 32.1 years of life expectancy at $3,120 per year. We reduce this to its present worth by multiplying $3,120 per year by 15.803, the 5% discount factor. Loss of physical power, vitality and enjoyment of life One who sustains an injury as a result of the wrongful conduct of a tortfeasor is entitled to compensation for loss of physical power, vitality and enjoyment of As Justice Sharpe said in Cawood v. Earl Paige & Co., supra, at 239 Mich. 490, 214 N.W. at 404: "He will no longer be permitted to enjoy many of the things in life which it may well be said 'make life worth living.' He will always be crippled, and must suffer the inconvenience and humiliation incident to such physical condition." Plaintiff was truly a family man. His activities centered around his employment and his family circle. His social and recreational activities revolved around his wife, Mary Jo, and their children. These activities included dancing, ice skating, walking through the nearby woods or the Lake Michigan shore, family picnics mushroom hunting, and shopping. Plaintiff enjoyed solitary walks through the woods and along the Lake shore. He spent considerable time reading. His crippled condition has dislocated the family circle and terminated these highly desirable and happy pursuits. Increased emotional distress has disrupted family harmony. The testimony, professional and that of friends and neighbors, substantiates the conclusion that Gowdy has lost spirit and that his physical power and vitality are severely curtailed. He is entitled to recover damages for this substantial loss and impairment. The testimony supports an award in the sum of $60 per week for the period from the date of his injury to the date of trial. 174 weeks. Plaintiff's impairment is permanent. His future award for loss of the capacity to enjoy life, physical power and vitality is measured at $25 per week ($1.300 a year) for the period of his life expectancy (32.1 years) reduced to its present value by application of the 5% discount factor of 15.803. Impaired earning capacity Before August 23, 1963. plaintiff possessed a capability of performing a full range of physical activities in his employment, which required considerable walking, climbing, standing, lifting and carrying of heavy items. All those aetivities incident to his work as a journeyman electrician he was able to perform with ease. His injuries caused an outright destruction of his abilty to work as a journeyman electrician. His disability is total; he cannot resume his former employment or any work which requires a broad scope of physical activities for which he was previously qualified and able to accomplish. Medical testimony establishes a modicum of residuum employability within a restricted and circumscribed area of physical activity, but plaintiff's opportunities for re-employ ment in the electrical field are minimal, if not in fact non-existent.1 In the light of the evidence, we are compelled to the judgment that his injuries are total and permanent. This judgment is likewise that of the Social Security Administration. Averaging plaintiff's annual earnings during the five years preceding his injuries, we find plaintiff's minimum annual wage then was $6,707.28. Plaintiff's expert, Professor John P. Henderson, of the faculty of Michigan State University, used this annual minimum earning level in computing plaintiff's past and future impairment of earning capacity. This figure is considerably less than the actual average weekly earnings of Gowdy at the time of his injuries. His immediate pre-injury average weekly wage was $168.50, which is a justifiable basis for computation of the impairment of his earning capacity Were we to use the $168.50 figure, the ultimate result would be approximately 20% greater than the amounts computed by Professor Henderson in his testimony. The prevailing union rate for journeymen electricians in the Western Michigan area is set forth in the testimony, and the prevailing weekly wage for the standard 40-hour work week on the date of the plaintiff's injuries to this date, including fringe benefits, ranges from $164.43 during August of 1963, to $202.88 in June of 1966. 1 Dr. Robert W. Jarka, an orthopedic surgeon, concluded as of February 18, 1966, that Gowdy was unemployable. Dr. Lauretti stated: "In the first place. he might get rid of the greater part of his pain, but I don't think he would ever get rid of all of it; and as far as any unrestricted work, I think this man is disabled from doing certain types of work. *** The only type of work he would be able to return to would be to work on level ground. As long as the material that he is walking on-be it ground or cement or anything, as long as it is level-he would have less trouble, but he would still have pain. Whether or not he could put in a full eight-hour day, even working on level ground, I can't say. I think that he would still have some pain. "As far as climbing ladders or poles, or even walking on. say, narrow planks, where he could easily lose his balance and fall, I don't think he could do that. "Q. What about walking on rough or uneven ground or surfaces? "A. No, no. He would have trouble." (Deposition of Dr. Lauretti, pp. 25, 26.) Therefore, when we accept as an annual earning level the $6,707.28 figure used by Professor Henderson, we fix this annual rate on the conservative side of the ledger. It is the minimum established by plaintiff. Under Michigan law Gowdy should be fully compensated for any loss or reduction in his earning capacity. Canning v. Hannaford, 373 Mich. 41, 127 N.W. 2d 851 (1964); Prince v. Lott, 369 Mich. 606, 120 N.W. 2d 780 (1963); Routsaw v. McClain, 365 Mich. 167, 112 N.W. 2d 123 (1961); Harris v. Wiener, 362 Mich. 656, 107 N.W. 2d 789 (1961); Lorenz v. Sowle, 360 Mich. 550, 104 N.W. 2d 347 (1960); Miller v. Pillow, 337 Mich. 262, 59 N.W. 2d 283 (1953). As Justice Dethmers said in Prince v. Lott, supra, at 610, 120 N.W. 2d 782: **the factor to be considered in determining such damages is not what plaintiff would have but what he could have earned but for the injury. It is the loss of earning capacity for which damages are to be awarded. Norris v. Elmdale Elevator Co., 216 Mich. 548, 185 N.W. 696; Miller v. Pillow, 337 Mich. 262, 59 N.W. 2d 283; Harris v. Wiener, 362 Mich. 656, 107 N.W. 2d 789.” We have considered that plaintiff has received earnings from other employment since his injury and has worked as a substitute rural mailman. The Michigan Supreme Court has adopted the rule that "impairment of earning capacity is not equated with wage loss." Conceivably, plaintiff's post-injury income could exceed earnings received from pre-injury employment. This, however, is not the norm of measurement. Plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the entire amount of the established preinjury earning capacity, so long as there is a continuation to the impairment of that earning capacity. His post-injury employment is insufficient to establish a revived earning capacity when weighed against his established wage earnings capacity as a journeyman electrician. Impaired earning capacity from the date of the accident to July 12, 1967 is $26,053.96. We here use the annual minimum earning level of $6,707.28. Professor Henderson based plaintiff's life expectancy upon Table "A" of "The Length of Working Life for Males, 1900-1960" U.S. Dept. of Labor Manpower Report (No. 8), July 1963, as standing at 21.667 years from the date of the trial. December 22, 1966. Because it is approximately six and a half months since the date of the trial, we use a flat twenty-one years as his work life expectancy in computing plaintiff's future impairment to his earning capacity. Again, using the minimum annual income level of $6,707.28 for a period of twenty-one years, this results in a total of $140.852.88. Under Michigan law, future damages should be reduced to present worth. Professor Henderson testified that according to information obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor, future wages are reasonably expected to increase at the rate of 5% per annum. This balances out the 5% formula for reduction of future damages to present worth. Future wage increases that would reasonably be expected by Gowdy would be equal to the adjustment of his future damages to present worth. Professor Henderson included in his analysis on impairment of future earning capacity loss of fringe benefits which plaintiff would sustain by virtue of his disability. This is a proper element of damages. Professor Henderson's computations are reasonable, and therefore, adopted by this court. His testimony establishes a total loss of fringe benefits from the date of the accident, computed on plaintiff's life expectancy, as 10.6% of gross earnings. Therefore, 10.6% of $166,906.84 is $17,692.13. Plaintiff's damages are summarized as follows: Pain and suffering: Two years (from date of injury to 8-23-65) at $130 per week $13, 520. 00 7,000.00 Future $3,120 X 15.803 49, 305, 36 Total 69, 825. 36 Loss of physical power, vitality and enjoyment of life: $60 per week for 174 weeks $1,300X15.803 Total 10, 440. 00 20,543.90 30,983.90 Ampaired earning capacity: $6.707.28 per year from date of accident, 2-3, to Jay 12 Chairman, Select Subcommittee on Labor, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. HOLLAND: I have just received your letter and am glad to hear that my survey on Power Press accidents will be made a part of the hearing record. I can only emphasize what I have already stated. The archaic method of feeding a Power Press by hand must be eliminated by law. Only this morning my shop superintendent and myself visited a plant operating several Power presses. No guards were being used except two hand tripping devices. Parts were being fed by hand into the dies. Any failure of the clutch mechanism on any one of these presses will mean a lost hand or maybe two. I'm sorry your letter arrived too late for me to make any extended remarks, but I am very glad action is going to be taken. Sincerely, W. H. SEARJEANT. A SURVEY OF POWER PRESS ACCIDENTS, THEIR CAUSES, AND RECOMMENDATIONS (By W. H. Searjeant, President, Searjeant Metal Products, Inc., Mendon, NY.) THE HAZARD AND ITS CONSEQUENCES Power presses are a major source of costly accidents in industry today. Each time the ram of the press descends to meet the metal forming die, the operator is exposed to injury ranging from mangled fingers to amputated hands. Such injuries are not reversible-for any given worker, one in a lifetime is unacceptable, since it represents loss of function and frequently loss of livelihood. Usually one thinks of the Metal Stamping Industry when one thinks of power presses, There are, however, hundreds and possibly thousands of companies using power presses to produce certain parts for their products that are not classified as Metal Stampers, Belts, cameras, projectors, eye glasses, copy machines, etc. all contain metal stamped parts. Statistics are very hard to collect regarding the number of accidents happening on power presses, their causes and severity. Also the cost to industry is hard to determine and often erroneously reported. The most complete available statistics are to be found in the reports of the State Labor Bureaus. Compensation claims are used to determine the cost of the injuries reported. Due, however, to a recent ruling by the courts, injured workers find that they are able to bring a suit against the manufacturer of the press on which they were injured and/or against any |