Ballou v. Indus. Comm'n

• Decision Date: 15 February 1921
• Docket Number: No. 13693.,13693.
• Citation: 296 Ill. 434,129 N.E. 755
• Parties: BALLOU v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

296 Ill. 434

129 N.E. 755

BALLOU

v.INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.

No. 13693.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 15, 1921.

Error to Circuit Court, Kendall County; Adam Cliffe, Judge.

Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Frank Luther for compensation for injuries, opposed by Bert Ballou and others.Compensation was awarded and the award confirmed by the circuit court, and defendants bring error.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

John M. Raymond and John K. Newhall, both of Aurora, for plaintiffs in error.

Alschuler, Putnam & Flannigen, of Aurora, for defendant in error.

STONE, J.

Defendant in error, Frank Luther, on March 30, 1917, while employed about machinery used in connection with the sand pit of the plaintiffs in error, was seriously injured.While oiling some of the machinery used in connection with plaintiffs in error's business his jacket was caught by a revolving shaft and his arms drawn into the machine.The evidence discloses that he lost the index finger and the distal phalange of the thumb of the right hand; that the joints of the remaining fingers were anchylosed or stiffened; that while he could grasp objects of the size of two fingers of a man's hand yet his hand could not be closed entirely; that there was likewise a stiffening or a of motion of the wrist joint; that the left arm was fractured in the upper third of the humerus; that the wrist was anchylosed, and in addition there was a severance of the nerve controlling the muscles used in lifting the hand, so that he had what is known as ‘drop wrist,’ meaning that the hand could not be raised at the wrist; that though the members of the left hand were not lost, all are stiff in the joints and limited in their use.The medical testimony of both parties to this cause of action tends to show that the defendant in error suffered a loss of at least 75 per cent. of the use of the right hand and 66 2/3 per cent. of the left hand, the evidence of defendant in error tending to show that the right hand is practically useless so far as labor is concerned.The Industrial Commission, on review, found that the applicant, as a result of the accident, had suffered the permanent and complete loss of both hands, and entered an award in the sum of $7.50 per week for 416 weeks and a pension for the remainder of applicant's life in the sum of $20.80 per month, ‘for the reason that the injury sustained caused the permanent and complete loss of use of both hands, and for the further reason that the injuries sustained have caused complete disability, which renders the petitioner wholly and permanently incapable of work.’This award having been confirmed by the circuit court, the case comes here on writ of error.

Plaintiffs in error contend that the finding of the Industrial Commission is insufficient, in that it does not find that the applicant suffered a loss of both hands, as provided by the last clause of paragraph (e) of section 8 of the Workmen's Compensation Act of 1915(Laws 1915, p. 400); that a finding that the applicant suffered the permanent and complete loss of use of both hands is not a finding which complies with this provision of the statute.It is further contended that there is no competent evidence in the record tending to establish that the accident in question caused the loss of both hands within the meaning of paragraph (e) so as to constitute total and permanent disability for the purpose of fixing compensation under paragraph (f) of section 8, and that the competent evidence shows that the defendant in error was not wholly and permanently incapable of working, as required by paragraph (f).

Paragraph (e) of section 8 of the Compensation Act of 1915 provides as follows:

‘For the loss of a hand, or the permanent and complete loss of its use, fifty per centum of the average weekly wage during 150 weeks.* * * The loss of both hands, or both arms, or both feet, or both legs, or both eyes, or of any two thereof, shall constitute total and permanent disability, to be compensated according to the compensation fixed by paragraph (f) of this...