City of Chicago v. Indus. Comm'n
| Decision Date | 11 May 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. 30862.,30862. |
| Citation | 85 N.E.2d 665,403 Ill. 105 |
| Parties | CITY OF CHICAGO v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Superior Court, Cook County; U. S. Schwartz, Judge.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Occupational Diseases Act by Della Rose, claimant, opposed by the City of Chicago, employer, to recover compensation for the death of Walter W. Rose, deceased. To review a judgment of the superior court reversing an order of the Industrial Commission sustaining findings of arbitrator allowing the claim, the claimant brings error.
Judgment affirmed.
Harry L. Yale, of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
Benjamin S. Adamowski, Corporation Counsel, of Chicago (L. Louis Karton and Sydney R. Drebin, both of Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.
The arbitrator allowed the widow of Walter W. Rose compensation on her claim made under the Workmen's Occupational Diseases Act. (Ill.Rev.Stat. 1947, chap. 48, pars. 172.1 et seq.) After hearing additional evidence the Industrial Commission sustained his findings. On certiorari the superior court of Cook County reversed the order of the commission, and this court granted a writ of error to review that decision. The question is whether there is any evidence in law to support the finding of the commission that death resulted from an occupational disease.
At the time of his death the deceased, 60 years of age, was employed as a laborer by the Chicago sewer department. He had been so employed for 19 years, enjoying good health during the entire period. His duties involved cleaning out the sewers, making up mortar for bricklayers, digging out caved-in sewers and filling in the excavations after repairs were completed. On October 6, 1945, he became ill at his home and died about ten days thereafter. The weight of the evidence indicates the probable cause of death was Weil's disease, a rare disease ordinarily transmitted by contact with the excreta of diseased rats and dogs. The disease is caused by a spirochete which invades the blood stream either through the skin or by ingestion. The spirochetes may be found in any place where a rodent population is likely to exist, such as sewers, mines, river water or on exposed fruit and vegetables.
The only evidence introduced by plaintiff in error to show that the decedent contracted the disease in his occupation is contained in the testimony of decedent's foreman. That witness testified that grimy substances accumulate on the stringers and supports sometimes used in the sewers to sheath the sides of excavations; that he often observed, in the grass around catch basins, holes which are caused by rats, but that he never saw a rat in a sewer; and that the decedent customarily carried his lunch to work, and went to a saloon at noon for beer to drink with his lunch.
The city physician testified, on behalf of defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Lazenby
... ... morning, the restaurant operated by the plaintiff in error, in the city of Anna, was discovered to be on fire. After the fire had been brought ... ...
-
Sperling v. Industrial Com'n
...(1967), 38 Ill.2d 461, 231 N.E.2d 593; Byrd v. Industrial Comm'n (1965), 33 Ill.2d 115, 210 N.E.2d 535; City of Chicago v. Industrial Comm'n (1949), 403 Ill. 105, 85 N.E.2d 665), we observe that the direct proof approach is too rigid for rote application because it fails to take into accoun......
-
Sperling v. Industrial Com'n
...(1967), 38 Ill.2d 461, 231 N.E.2d 593; Byrd v. Industrial Comm'n (1965), 33 Ill.2d 115, 210 N.E.2d 535; City of Chicago v. Industrial Comm'n (1949), 403 Ill. 105, 85 N.E.2d 665) we observe that the direct proof approach is too rigid for rote application because it fails to take into account......
-
Cook County v. Industrial Commission
...Com. (1967), 38 Ill.2d 461, 231 N.E.2d 593; Byrd v. Industrial Com. (1965), 33 Ill.2d 115, 210 N.E.2d 535; City of Chicago v. Industial Com. (1949), 403 Ill. 105, 85 N.E.2d 665. As we have often stated, it is the province of the Industrial Commission to determine the facts and to draw reaso......