## Facts

- Patricia Elaine Richmond, a full-time homemaker and minister’s wife, was injured when a logging truck owned by Zimbrick Logging, Inc. and driven by its employee, Michael Alan Pyle, struck the car in which she was a passenger.
- Richmond had been married since 1971 and had not worked outside the home except for occasional odd jobs; she was home-schooling three of her children and performing household work.
- Richmond also performed unpaid work in connection with her husband’s ministry, including volunteer church duties and janitorial tasks.
- Richmond did not testify to any concrete plans to enter paid employment; her husband testified they had no such plans at the time of the accident.
- The parties stipulated to $5,971.60 in medical expenses and $1,428.35 for household help during recuperation.
- A vocational rehabilitation expert testified Richmond’s injuries limited her to no more than 20 hours of work per week, reducing her earning capacity by about half, and estimated lifetime earning potential using average wages for persons of similar age, gender, and education.
- The jury awarded $30,000 in non-economic damages and $37,399.95 in economic damages; because stipulated economic damages were $7,399.95, the remaining $30,000 necessarily reflected impaired earning capacity.

## Issues

1. Whether a homemaker with no wage history and no stated plan to work outside the home may recover economic damages for past or future impairment of earning capacity under ORS 18.560(2)(a).
2. Whether “objectively verifiable monetary losses” under ORS 18.560(2)(a) requires proof of past wages or specific intent to enter paid employment.
3. Whether the trial court erred by admitting vocational expert testimony, refusing to strike the earning-capacity claim, and instructing the jury on impaired earning capacity.

## Decision

- The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment.
- The court held that lack of prior paid employment or concrete plans to seek paid employment does not, as a matter of law, bar recovery for impairment of earning capacity.
- The court concluded that the vocational expert’s testimony and use of labor-market data provided an objectively verifiable basis for the claimed impairment.
- The trial court did not err in admitting the expert testimony, submitting the claim to the jury, or instructing on impaired earning capacity.

## Legal Principles

- Impairment of earning capacity compensates for diminished ability to earn income, not merely lost wages actually earned before the injury.
- ORS 18.560(2)(a)’s requirement of “objectively verifiable monetary losses” does not make past income or proven intent to work for wages a prerequisite to earning-capacity damages.
- Objective verification may be established through evidence such as medical limitations, vocational evaluation, and labor-market or statistical wage data, even when the plaintiff was not employed for pay at the time of injury.
- A legal challenge to earning-capacity damages fails where the record contains evidence permitting a factfinder to assess the loss on an objective, non-speculative basis.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed an award for impaired earning capacity, holding that a homemaker may recover such economic damages when supported by objectively verifiable evidence, even without a prior wage record or specific plans to enter paid employment.


Richmond v. Zimbrick Logging, Inc., 124 Or. App. 631 (1993)