Henry v. Ford Motor Co.

• Decision Date: 30 October 1935
• Docket Number: No. 33.,33.
• Citation: 263 N.W. 56,273 Mich. 323
• Parties: HENRY v. FORD MOTOR CO.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

273 Mich. 323

263 N.W. 56

HENRY

v.FORD MOTOR CO.

No. 33.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Oct. 30, 1935.

Appeal from Department of Labor and Industry.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by William Henry, Sr., claimant, opposed by the Ford Motor Company, employer. The Department of Labor and Industry awarded claimant compensation, and the employer appeals.

Award vacated.

Argued before the Entire Bench.

Chas. D. Symonds and Ray E. MacAllister, both of Iron Mountain, for appellant.

Derham & Derham, of Iron Mountain, for appellee.

BUSHNELL, Justice.

We quote the following statement of facts from a part of the opinion of the commission:

‘The record shows that the plaintiff was a pump repair man and had been such for a period of 20 years or more prior to the time he started working for the defendant and that he still engaged in this type of work when he worked for the defendant until he was injured May 10, 1927. He testified it took him three or four years to learn to do this work. He had worked for defendant about four years before the accident. He was required to repair, oil and look after two large pumps, weighing from 1900 pounds to 2000 pounds, and a number of smaller rotary pumps weighing around 300 pounds. He had to keep them in repair and running order. * * *

‘On the 10th day of May, 1927, plaintiff, while carrying a monkey wrench and hammer caught his foot on a pipe runway which tripped him up and as he was falling he held out an arm trying to catch himself and the weight of his body fell against a steel column, dislocating his right shoulder. He was immediately taken to defendant's first aid department and from there to the defendant's hospital, where he was treated by Dr. Alexander. * * * An anesthetic was administered and Dr. Alexander put the bones of the arm back in the socket and bandaged the plaintiff's arm tight to his body. The following day he went to work. This bandage remained on his body for about two months. During that time the defendant assigned to him two helpers * * *. About a month after he returned to work and while his arm was still bandaged and in a sling, he had a talk with Jack Wilson, superintendent of the distillation plant. He asked Mr. Wilson for compensation and he testified that Wilson replied as follows:

“Go ahead and do what work you can with one hand.' It is fairly well established in the record that the plaintiff worked for quite a period of time after that with one hand, that he carried his arm in a sling for about two months. * * * During that time he did practicallyno work but he did supervise the pump repairs made by Plosky and Bass. After his arm was taken out of the sling Plosky was put at other work and Bass continued to help plaintiff. The plaintiff testified that he worked with one hand all that summer.

‘Defendant filed a report of noncompensable accident on May 27, 1927, but no report of compensable accident was ever filed.’

The medical experts agree that plaintiff, at the time the testimony was taken, July 24, 1934, could not raise his right arm more than 90 degrees. When defendant's distillation plant was shut down in the summer of 1932, plaintiff was transferred to the body plant, where he worked on planers until he ‘played out.’ He said, ‘My arm got lame and I had to quit.’ He was then taken to the hospital, treated, and...