Bd. of Educ. of High Sch. Dist. No. 502 v. Indus. Comm'n

• Citation: 301 Ill. 611,134 N.E. 70
• Decision Date: 22 February 1922
• Docket Number: No. 14112.,14112.
• Parties: BOARD OF EDUCATION OF HIGH SCHOOL DIST. NO. 502 v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois

301 Ill. 611

134 N.E. 70

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF HIGH SCHOOL DIST. NO. 502

v.INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.

No. 14112.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 22, 1922.

Error to Circuit Court, Bureau County; Joe A. Davis, Judge.

Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act by William A. Hemmer for compensation for injuries, opposed by the Board of Education of High School District No. 502, employer. Award for claimant by arbitrator was set aside by the Industrial Commission, and claimant sued out a writ of certiorari, and claimant brings error.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.J. L. Murphy, of Spring Valley, for plaintiff in error.

John J. Sherlock, of Chicago, and McDougall, Chapman & Bayne, of Ottawa, for defendant in error.

DUNN, J.

William A. Hemmer was a manual training teacher, employed by the board of education of high school district No. 502 of Bureau county. He was accidently injured on March 5, 1915, while engaged in the course of his employment in instructing a pupil in the use of a circular saw in making a drawer. His left hand was drawn in contact with the saw, and the first three fingers were injured. He applied for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Laws 1913, p. 335), and upon a hearing before an arbitrator and award was made to him. Upon the petition of the board of education the award was reviewed by the Industrial Commission, and was set aside for the reason that the school district was not engaged in any business, occupation, or enterprise that would automatically place it within the jurisdiction of the commission. The claimant sued out a writ of certiorari from the circuit court, but that court quashed the writ, and upon the petition of the claimant a writ of error was awarded to review the proceedings.

Under sections 4 and 5 of the Workmen's Compensation Act the school district was an employer and the plaintiff in error was an employee. The only question in dispute is whether the district was subject to the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. On the part of the plaintiff in error it is contended that the provisions of the act apply automatically to the school district because, it is engaged in an enterprise in which statutory regulations are imposed for the regulating, guarding, use, or placing of machinery or appliances for the protection and safeguarding of the employees or the public therein, under subdivision 8 of section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act.

The defendant in error is a township high school district, which maintains a manual training department conducted in a building separate from the regular school building, It is a two-story building, 60 by 100 feet, containing the heating plant for both buildings, as well as the manual training department of the school. About 60 pupils were receiving instruction in manual training. In the department were tools for all kinds of wood work, including a planing machine, a circular saw, a rip saw, and a hand saw. The planing machine and the circular and rip saws were operated by electrical power. The circular saw, by which the plaintiff in error was injured, was not guarded or protected, though there were proper guards for it in the building.

It is contended that the respondent is brought within the provisions of subdivision 8 by reason of the statutory requirement contained in section 1 of the act of June 29, 1915, which provides:

‘That all power-driven machinery, including all saws, planers, wood-shapers, * * * in any factory, mercantile establishment, mill or workshop, shall be so located wherever possible, as not to be dangerous to employees or shall be properly enclosed, fenced or otherwise protected. All dangerous places in or about mercantile establishments, factories, mills or workshops, near to which any employee is obliged to pass, or to be employed shall, where practicable, be properly inclosed, fenced or otherwise guarded. No machine in any factory, mercantile establishment, mill or workshop, shall be used when the same is known to be dangerously defective, and no repairs shall be made to the active mechanism or operative part of any machine when the machine is in motion.’ Laws of 1915, p. 418.

The manual training room in which these machines and tools...