Pastaleniec v. a & P TEA CO., INC.

212 N.W.2d 734, 49 Mich. App. 702, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 870
CourtMichigan Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 26, 1973
DocketDocket 14960
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 212 N.W.2d 734 (Pastaleniec v. a & P TEA CO., INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pastaleniec v. a & P TEA CO., INC., 212 N.W.2d 734, 49 Mich. App. 702, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 870 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973).

Opinion

Fitzgerald, P. J.

The Great A & P Tea Company, Inc, appeals from an opinion and order of the Workmen’s Compensation Appeal Board which affirmed a referee’s award of compensation benefits to plaintiff for permanent and total disability caused by incurable insanity pursuant to § 10(b)(6) of the former act, MCLA 412.10(b)(6); MSA 17.160(b)(6). 1

Plaintiff was born March 15, 1917. He left school about the tenth grade and in 1936 began working as a plumber’s assistant under the guidance of a Mr. Kaufman, a Detroit plumber.

Plaintiff worked happily for Mr. Kaufman as a plumber journeyman for about 24 years, except for a hitch in the Army during World War II.

In 1960, Mr. Kaufman died and the business was *704 discontinued. Plaintiff went to work for the Great A & P Tea Company, Inc., and worked for 2-1/2 years in salvage. He was then transferred to a railroad car unloading job at the company’s warehouse. About two weeks later, on March 28, 1963, plaintiff injured himself when he fell from a ramp which was placed between the loading dock and a railroad car. The ramp slipped off the railroad car and plaintiff fell about three feet to concrete pavement. The ramp fell on his back. Plaintiff lost about two weeks of work, returned for one day and for one hour on a second day and then quit because of inability to work or was fired for allegedly drinking on the job.

The company voluntarily paid compensation benefits of $36 per week for 154 weeks from March 29, 1963 to March 12, 1966.

On September 10, 1965, plaintiff filed an application for hearing which alleged permanent and total disability from psychiatric disorders. Plaintiff claimed that the accident and the resulting pain to his back and shoulders caused nervousness and anxiety to such an extent that he was unable to return to gainful employment.

Following hearing, the referee awarded compensation benefits for permanent and total disability, finding:

"We are convinced from the record that the episode of March 28, 1963, constituted the trigger which set in motion an active psychotic process, with depressive components, which has since disabled plaintiff from return to common labor. Any underlying problems which he may have previously had and had been able to master were translated into active disability by the traumatic incident. We are also satisfied that the increase in his drinking to the point of acute alcoholism at times after the injury is likewise related.
"His psychotic condition equates with insanity.”

*705 On appeal, the appeal board affirmed, quoting in an opinion the referee’s opinion in its entirety and adding:

"The referee’s opinion coincides with the record in this cause. Plaintiff’s condition meets the definition of incurable insanity as detailed in the Court of Appeals’ opinion in the case of Raymond Sprute v Herlihy Mid-Continent Co, Bituminous Casualty Co, and Second Injury Fund, 32 Mich App 574; 189 NW2d 89 (1971).
"There is no question that plaintiff’s mental condition was tuned by many factors not related to plaintiff’s employment; it is clear that his mental illness was affected and worsened by the injury he sustained while at work loading trucks on March 28, 1963. Plaintiff’s work record of one day and one hour two weeks after injury and none since is persuasive.”

Other factors important to an understanding of this case include the fact that plaintiff married for the first time on October 7, 1960 to a woman he had known and dated for some ten years. Except for his time in the army, plaintiff lived all of his life with his mother in his mother’s house and continued to live there with his mother and. his wife after his marriage.

Following the injury, plaintiff began drinking and was hospitalized on a number of occasions for problems relating to his drinking and emotional difficulties. His hospitalization for those problems included a 75-day commitment to the Northville State Hospital by probate court order in 1965.

While the appeal to the appeal board was pending, plaintiff died and his wife, the administratrix of his estate, was substituted as party plaintiff.

On appeal, The Great A & P Tea Company does not directly oppose the board’s finding that plaintiff was incurably insane, but contends that the *706 incapacity did not result from an injury arising out of and in the course of plaintiffs employment.

The gist of the problem on appeal is contained in the testimony of the two psychiatrists presented by the parties.

Dr. Richard Komisaruk testified on plaintiffs behalf. Dr. Komisaruk’s diagnosis of plaintiff was that he had a "severe depressive illness, probably psychotic with hypochondriasis and possible alcoholism”. He described plaintiffs mental problem as follows:

"The main complaints that this patient has at present are largely psychological in nature. He complains of being 'weak as a cat.’ His back has been persistently sore and uncomfortable; this pain is relieved only partially when his mother rubs his back with alcohol. He also complains of marked anxiety and 'nervousness’, as well as severe insomnia to the extent that he is able to sleep only three to four hours per night. In addition, there has been a loss of libido. Mr. Pastaleniec expresses concern that his wife, whom he married late in life, will lose interest in him because of his inability to attend to her sexual needs. Generally, Mr. Pastaleniec presents as a very dependent, depressed person. His self-esteem is at a remarkable low. * * * At several points during the interview he was close to tears, particularly when he spoke of his father whom he revered very highly * * * and his late employer, a Mr. Jack W. Kaufman for whom he had worked as a plumber for 25 years. Since Mr. Kaufman died, Mr. Pastaleniec has been unable to work as a plumber and, in fact, took on the work of a loader for the A & P Company as if in a ritual of self-abnegation. This apparent retrogression and the type of employment that Mr. Pastaleniec sought is characteristic of his personality conflicts.
"Further exploration of the psychologicaLhistory indicates that Mr. Pastaleniec has functioned as an obsessive-compulsive character for many years. His standards of ethics are very high to the point of rigidity. *707 His choice of employment as a plumber has psychodynamic implications as to the level of psychosexual development at which the neurotic fixations occurred. There is a history of strong attachment to both parents as well as the employer and the latter’s wife. * * * Mr. Pastaleniec has been unable to differentiate himself from his family. However, the feelings which bind him to the family and its surrogates are highly ambivalent. Consequently, when he went into mourning for his employer [Kaufman] the kind of pathologic picture which we now see began to develop. In short, Mr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mansfield v. ENTERPRISE BRASS WORKS CORP.
295 N.W.2d 851 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1980)
Redfern v. Sparks-Withington Co.
268 N.W.2d 28 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1978)
Epps v. Mercy Hospital
244 N.W.2d 340 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1976)
Galac v. Chrysler Corp.
235 N.W.2d 359 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1975)
Gilbert v. Reynolds Metals Co.
228 N.W.2d 542 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1975)
Legut v. Detroit Window Cleaning Co.
221 N.W.2d 232 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
212 N.W.2d 734, 49 Mich. App. 702, 1973 Mich. App. LEXIS 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pastaleniec-v-a-p-tea-co-inc-michctapp-1973.