Franklin Coal & Coke Co. v. Indus. Comm'n
Decision Date | 15 February 1921 |
Docket Number | No. 13716.,13716. |
Citation | 296 Ill. 329,129 N.E. 811 |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Parties | FRANKLIN COAL & COKE CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, Franklin County; Charles H. Miller, Judge.
Proceeding under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Hurd's Rev. St. 1919, c. 48, §§ 126-152i) by Henry F. Weaver for compensation for injuries, opposed by the Franklin Coal & Coke Company, employer. Compensation was awarded, but the award was set aside by the circuit court, and the claimant brings error.
Reversed, and award confirmed.George R. Stone, of Marion, and R. E. Hickman, of Benton, for plaintiff in error.
W. H. Hart and W. W. Hart, both of Benton, for defendant in error.
Henry F. Weaver was injured on October 28, 1918, while using a joiner or planer in the construction of mine or pit cars, so that he lost the use of some of the fingers of his left hand, and upon his application an award of compensation was made to him by the Industrial Commission against the Franklin Coal & Coke Company. Upon a writ of certiorari the circuit court of Franklin county set aside the award and the claimant has sued out a writ of error to reverse this judgment.
The only controversy is whether the plaintiff in error at the time of his injury was working for the defendant in error as an employee, or was an independent contractor or was working for an independent contractor.
The defendant in error was operating coal mines at Royalton, in Franklin county, and the plaintiff in error had been in its employ as a carpenter most of the time for three or four years before he was injured, being carried on the payroll and drawing his pay, as did other employees, twice a month, at the rate of 75 cents an hour for the time he worked. Before the accident the defendant in error had difficulty in getting mine cars for use in its mines, which it had been accustomed to purchase, and it therefore arranged to get the material and have the cars constructed. The cars were built by the plaintiff in error and George Taylor, another carpenter employed by the defendant in error, in the shop provided by defendant in error upon its premises about 700 or 800 feet from one of its shafts. The defendant in error furnished all materials and practically all the tools used in the construction of the cars and directed the sizes and dimensions of the cars to be built. The plaintiff in error and Taylor were paid $17.50 for the work on each car. While they were at work on the cars they were also subject to the orders of defendant in error for other work about the mine as carpenters, and actually did other carpenter work for the defendant in error, for which they were paid at the rate of 75 cents an hour on the pay roll of the company.
Concerning the contract for the work on these cars the plaintiff in error testified:
Taylor testified:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hassebroch v. Weaver Const. Co.
...not the fact of control, that is the principal factor in distinguishing a servant from a contractor. Franklin Coal & Coke Co. v. Industrial Comm., 296 Ill. 329, 129 N.E. 811. The most important point 'in determining the main question (contractor or employee) is the right of either to termin......
-
Crowell v. Benson Crowell v. Same
...Co., 37 Idaho, 707, 721, 218 P. 356; Cinofsky v. Industrial Commission, 290 Ill. 521, 525 125 N. E. 286; Franklin Coal Co. v. Industrial Commission, 296 Ill. 329, 334, 129 N. E. 811; A. E. Norris Coal Co. v. Jackson, 80 Ind. App. 423, 425, 141 N. E. 227; Murphy v. Shipley, 200 Iowa, 857, 85......
-
Rutherford v. Tobin Quarries
... ... S.W.2d 781; Jones v. Century Coal Co., 46 S.W.2d ... 197; Hinkle v. Miller, 56 S.W.2d ... v. Lawrence, 72 Colo. 528, 213 P. 129; Franklin Coal ... Co. v. Ind. Comm., 296 Ill. 329, 129 N.E. 811; ... ...
-
McCain, Commissioner of Labor v. Crossett Lumber Co.
... ... contractor.' Franklin Coal & Coke Co. v ... Industrial Comm., 296 Ill. 329, ... ...