Besse v. Indus. Comm'n
| Decision Date | 19 October 1929 |
| Docket Number | No. 19489.,19489. |
| Citation | 168 N.E. 368,336 Ill. 283 |
| Parties | BESSE v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, Whiteside County; Nels A. Larson, Judge.
Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Charles E. Keiser, opposed by Robert W. Besse. The Industrial Commission approved the arbitrator's award of compensation, the Commission's decision was confirmed by the circuit court, and the employer brings error.
Reversed and rendered.William Greene and H. L. Howard, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
H. A. Brooks, of Dixon, for defendant in error.
Charles E. Keiser filed with the Industrial Commission a claim for compensation for an accidental injury which he alleged he suffered while employed by Robert W. Besse. The arbitrator awarded him $14 per week for 19 weeks, the period of temporary total incapacity for work, and $751 for necessary first aid, medical, surgical, and hospital services. The Industrial Commission, on review, approved the arbitrator's award. The circuit court of Whiteside county confirmed the decision of the commission, and by a writ of error the record is here for a further review.
The claimant, Keiser, is a plasterer, and Besse is the state's attorney of Whiteside county, and both reside in the city of Sterling. Keiser had built a sidewalk, plastered a mantel, and repaired a basement for Besse prior to the time he suffered the injuries for which he claims compensation. On each of these occasions Keiser employed his assistants and furnished the necessary tools and materials. Subsequently, according to Keiser's testimony, Besse, speaking with respect to his residence, inquired what it would cost to repair a cistern and to point a chimney, and when Keiser answered that he did not know, Besse told him to do the work and to furnish the materials. Keiser, assisted by a boy whom he employed, undertook both jobs. With the exception of a ladder which he borrowed from Besse, Keiser used his own tools. In the course of his work, Keiser climbed upon a porch to determine how a scaffold could be built around the chimney which he was to point, and, when he descended a ladder set against the house, he fell and suffered the injuries for which compensation is sought. Besse did not supervise the work.
Besse testified that he asked Keiser for an estimate of the cost of repairing the cistern; that Keiser told him the job would cost $25 or $30, and that he instructed Keiser to proceed; that, while Keiser was engaged in repairing the cistern, he observed that a chimney on the house needed pointing; that the witness answered, if it did, Keiser might as well do that job while he had the materials at the house; that nothing was said with respect to the time or quantity of materials required for the performance of the job; that Keiser worked when it suited his convenience; and that the witness exercised no control or supervision over him, but looked to him merely for results.
Besse, the plaintiff in error, denies Keiser's right to compensation on the ground, among others, that he was an independent contractor. In our view it will not be necessary to consider any other contention.
One who contracts to do a specific piece of work and hires and controls his assistants and executes the work...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nordland v. Poor Sisters of St. Francis Seraph of Perpetual Devotion
...Co. v. Industrial Comm., 346 Ill. 632, 179 N.E. 86; Hartley v. Red Ball Transit Co., 344 Ill. 534, 176 N.E. 751; Besse v. Industrial Comm., 336 Ill. 283, 168 N.E. 368. The right to control the manner of doing the work is probably the most important single consideration in determining whethe......
-
Hartley v. Red Ball Transit Co., 20668.
...person for whom the work is done only as to the result of the work and not as the means by which it is accomplished (Besse v. Industrial Com., 336 Ill. 283, 168 N. E. 368), and is one who undertakes to produce a given result without being in any way controlled as to the method by which he a......
-
Ignatowitch v. McLaughlin
... ... 776, 266 P. 594; Slyter v ... Clinton Constr. Co. 107 Cal.App. 348, 290 P. 643; ... Besse v. Industrial Commission, 336 Ill. 283, 168 ... N.E. 368; Hartley v. Red Ball Transit Co. 344 ... ...
-
Ignatowitch v. McLaughlin
...v. O'Brien, 90 Cal. App. 776, 266 P. 594;Slyter v. Clinton Const. Co. of California, 107 Cal. App. 348, 290 P. 643;Besse v. Industrial Commission, 336 Ill. 283, 168 N. E. 368;Hartley v. Red Ball Transit Co., 344 Ill. 534, 176 N. E. 751;May v. Farrell, 94 Cal. App. 703, 271 P. 789;Lutheran H......