Chicago Daily News Co. v. Indus. Comm'n

• Decision Date: 08 February 1923
• Docket Number: No. 14824.,14824.
• Citation: 306 Ill. 212,137 N.E. 797
• Parties: CHICAGO DAILY NEWS CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

306 Ill. 212

137 N.E. 797

CHICAGO DAILY NEWS CO.

v.INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.

No. 14824.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 19, 1922.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 8, 1923.

Error to Circuit Court, Cook County; Frank Johnston, Jr., Judge.

Proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act by Mary Soden and others to recover compensation for the death of Martin Soden, employee, opposed by the Chicago Daily News Company, employer. An award of compensation by the Industrial Commission was confirmed by the circuit court, and the employer brings error.

Reversed, and award set aside.

John J. Symes and George A. Schneider, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Ivor Jeffreys, of Chicago, for defendants in error.

THOMPSON, C. J.

Martin Soden, a boy past 17 years of age, was employed by the Chicago Daily News Company as a messenger. His duties were to run errands for his superiors to different parts of the building and of the city. He was paid $8 a week and gave his wages to his mother, who boarded and clothed him. February 17, 1919, he was on duty in the forenoon. At 12:30 he checked out for his luncheon hour. About 40 minutes later he was found on the third floor of the building occupied by the publishing company, with a serious gash in his abdomen. No one else was present when he was injured, and no one testified as to how the injury occurred. From this injury he died within two hours. He left surviving him his parents and an older sister. Plaintiff in error voluntarily paid all medical, hospital, and funeral expenses. On the question of compensation a hearing was had before an arbitrator, who found that the accident did not arise out of the employment of deceased. On review the Industrial Commission set aside the decision of the arbitrator, and entered an award in favor of the mother of deceased for $1,650. This decision was confirmed by the circuit court of Cook county, and this writ of error is prosecuted to review that judgment

The principal question presented is whether there is competent evidence in the record showing that the injury arose out of and in the course of the employment of deceased. The building occupied by plaintiff in error is a four-story building. There is a passenger elevator running from the main floor to the fourth floor. There is a stairway, leading from the business office, on the first floor, up to the second floor of the building. This statirway is closed by gates on both floors, and there is a sign on each gate to the effect that the stairway is not to be used between 7 a. m. and [306 Ill. 214]6 p. m. Some distance east of the second floor landing of the stairway described is a stairway leading from the second floor to the third and fourth floors. It was near the third floor landing of this stairway that the accident happened. About 60 feet east of the stairway last mentioned is another stairway leading from the main floor to the fourth floor, and near this stairway on the third floor is the boys' toilet. The boy was found in a narrow passageway a few feet from a broken window. On the west side of this passageway is a railing protecting it from the well, down which the stairway descended. On the east side was a partition separating the passageway from a room about 15 feet square, used as a filing room. The base of this partition was built of masonry and plaster to a height of about 4 feet. Above this was a partition of heavy frosted glass set in wooden framework. There were eight window spaces in the upper part of this partition, each approximately three feet by four feet. There were panes of heavy frosted glass in the four spaces immediately above the solid partition and in the two center spaces at the top of the partition. The glass had been removed from the spaces in the upper right and left-hand corners for the purpose of ventilation. An instant before the boy was discovered wounded, employees of plaintiff in error heard a loud crash and the falling of broken glass. Two of them rushed into the passageway, and found the glass at the north end of the partition immediately below the space from which the glass had been removed broken and scattered over the floor of the passageway. This glass was immediately opposite the stairway landing. When the two employees heard the crash and rushed into the passageway they saw the boy waling towards them, holding both his hands over his abdomen. He...