Bloom v. Industrial Commission

• Decision Date: 26 September 1975
• Docket Number: No. 46879,46879
• Citation: 61 Ill.2d 248,335 N.E.2d 423
• Parties: S. Edward BLOOM et al., Appellants, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. (George Edward Merica, Appellee.)
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 423

335 N.E.2d 423

61 Ill.2d 248

S. Edward BLOOM et al., Appellants, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. (George Edward Merica, Appellee.)

No. 46879.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Sept. 26, 1975.

George J. Gore, Chicago (Robert L. Brody, Chicago, of counsel), for appellants.

George A. Kranzler, Chicago (Ronald S. Davis, Chicago, of counsel), for appellee.

UNDERWOOD, Chief Justice:

S. Edward Bloom and Sedgwich Building Management and Contractors, employers of claimant George Edward Merica, Appeal directly (50 Ill.2d R. 302(a)) a judgment of the circuit court of Cook County confirming an Industrial Commission affirmance of an arbitrator's award of compensation to the employee. The sole issue here is whether the injuries arose out of and in the course of employment.

The 39-year-old claimant resided with his family in one of several apartment buildings owned by S. Edward Bloom, and had been employed by the latter for some 2 1/2 years to collect rents from other tenants in the building where he lived and do general maintenance and repair work on that and other buildings owned by the employer. Similar arrangements apparently existed with tenants of other buildings owned by bloom. On Saturday, August 1, 1970, claimant was told by Bloom to assist Bruce Tracy, a similarly employed tenant in another building who was present during the conversation, in hanging cabinets in an apartment in that building the next day. During that conversation claimant told Bloom that an 'Uncle Jim' Hare at 2006 Concord Avenue had a Skilsaw, 4-foot level and extension plank for sale at a specified price and was directed by Bloom to buy them. For the purpose claimant and Tracy testified that Bloom then gave claimant two $20 bills.

On the following day claimant collected rents and then went to the building where the cabinets were to be hung and worked there until afternoon. During the afternoon his daughter's 'boy friend,' George Lubertozzi, took him to Hare's apartment to buy the tools, after which claimant intended to return and 'rod out' a toilet or sink. At Hare's the car was parked in an alley, the tools put in the trunk and, because claimant gave Hare the two $20 bills in payment of the $33 sale price and Hare did not have change, claimant, Hare and Lubertozzi went into a nearby tavern to change one of the $20 bills. While there claimant and Hare had one beer, claimant received a receipt for the money and he inquired of Hare regarding other tools in which Bloom had expressed an interest. As they left the side door of the tavern three men with a bottle of wine were standing in the alley some 9 or 10 feet from the side door. One of the men asked Lubertozzi for a quarter, but Lubertozzi walked away, whereupon the same individual made the same request of claimant and was refused. As claimant started toward the car he was struck in the right leg by a piece of wood wielded by the assailant. Severe injuries to the leg resulted from the blow.

While the precise sequence of events at the tavern and content of the conversations is not entirely certain, it is clear that a conclusion by the Commission that claimant and Hare were putting money into their pockets and discussing the...