Har-Pen Truck Lines, Inc. v. Mills
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
378 F.2d 705 (1967)

- Written by Joe Cox, JD
Facts
Allen and Patricia Mills were killed driving on a road in Georgia when a load of pipe from a truck owned by Har-Pen Truck Lines (plaintiff) fell on their car and crushed Allen and Patricia. Wrongful-death claims were filed on behalf of Allen and Patricia by their three sons (defendants), and at trial, a jury awarded $100,000 for each parent. Har-Pen appealed the ruling on the grounds of miscalculations of the wrongful-death awards. Evidence regarding Allen established that he was a salesman with a variable income at the time of his death. In the last six weeks before Allen’s death, he earned about $616 monthly. In the last full quarter before Allen’s death, he earned about $754 per month. A coworker of Allen testified at trial that Allen could earn $15,000 a year as a salesman and had the potential to advance to greater compensation as an executive or manager. A mortality table indicated a life expectancy of 22.5 years for Allen, and the annuity table introduced by Mills provided a 7 percent discount rate. If the $616 figure was used, that would produce a value of $74,385. If the $754 figure was used, that would produce a value of $90,997. Undoubtedly, the $15,000 per-year figure would produce a value much higher ($150,780), with even higher figures noted for a possible manager or executive compensation. For Patricia Mills, Professor Pyun testified and valued her contribution as a homemaker until the youngest child completed college and then with nine years of outside work until Patricia reached retirement age. Professor Pyun valued Patricia’s services as a homemaker by positing that replacing her would cost more than Patricia would have earned as an outside worker. Pyun then valued Patricia’s household services for 11 years at $69,852 and her 9 years of outside work at $31,948 for a total of $101,800, with all figures reduced by a 7 percent discount rate. Har-Pen opposed the figures as too speculative and, in the case of Patricia Mills, invading the jury’s province to value the services of a homemaker.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Goldberg, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

