Supreme Court rules compensation must reflect lost earnings from specific work, not just disability group classification.

The Supreme Court quashed the lower court's judgment and remanded the case for a new trial regarding work-related disability compensation. The plaintiff argued that the defendant's refusal to hire him for specific roles like porter or parking attendant was unjustified, while the defendant contended that the plaintiff's refusal to accept such work increased his damages. The court held that the statutory disability group classification is insufficient to determine actual lost earnings and that the lower court failed to consider expert evidence regarding the plaintiff's ability to perform the offered jobs.