Friedman Mfg. Co. v. Indus. Comm'n of Illinois
| Decision Date | 21 October 1918 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 11911,11912.,s. 11911 |
| Citation | 120 N.E. 460,284 Ill. 554 |
| Parties | FRIEDMAN MFG. CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, Cook County; Oscar M. Torrison, Judge.
Application by Lydia Goodrode, administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Melvin Goodrode, for compensation for his death, arising out of and in the course of his employment with the Friedman Manufacturing Company, employer. The application was heard by an arbitrator, who entered an award for claimant, which was affirmed by the Industrial Board. The employer sued out a writ of certiorari from the circuit court, which dismissed writ and certified that the cause was one proper to be reviewed by the Supreme Court, and a writ of error was sued out of the Supreme Court in pursuance of that certificate. Thereafter the employer having failed to pay compensation, applicant applied to the circuit court for judgment for award, which was granted. The circuit court also certified that the cause was one proper to be reviewed by the Supreme Court, and, a writ of error being sued out, the two causes were consolidated. Judgments affirmed.Charles J. Faulkner, Jr., and Walter C. Kirk, both of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.
MacChesney, Becker, Angerstein & Rollo and Martin C. Koebel, all of Chicago, for defendant in error.
Lydia Goodrode, administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband, Melvin Goodrode, applied to the Industrial Board for compensation for his death arising out of and in the course of his employment by the plaintiff in error, the Friedman Manufacturing Company. The application was heard by an arbitrator, who entered an award on August 22, 1916. The Industrial Board sent by registered mail to the plaintiff in error a notice of the filing of the decision of the arbitrator and a copy of the award. The letter was receipted for in the name of the Friedman Manufacturing Company, by Mr. Lynch, assistant cashier. In pursuance of that notice so received by the plaintiff in error it petitioned for a review of the award, and a hearing was had before the board, which rendered a decision on June 20, 1917, affirming the award. On June 22, 1917, the board sent by registered mail to the plaintiff in error a copy of the decision and a notice of the time when it was filed, and the letter was receipted for in the same manner and by the same officer as before. On September 17, 1917, the plaintiff in error presented to the Industrial Board a petition for a modification of the finding of facts made in the decision. With the petition for a modification of the finding was presented an affidavit of the attorney for the plaintiff in error that the agent who received the notice and copy of the decision did not know what it was and held the decision on his desk without communicating to the attorney, who knew nothing about it until September 15, 1917. The board refused to modify the finding and gave notice of its decision on September 26, 1917. Within 20 days after the refusal of the board to modify its finding the plaintiff in error sued out a writ of certiorari from the circuit court of Cook county to review the decision of the board. The court quashed the writ of certiorari and dismissed it, and certified that the cause was one proper to be reviewed by this court. A writ of error was sued out of this court in pursuance of that certificate.
The plaintiff in error having failed to pay compensation according to the award, Lydia Goodrode presented to the circuit court of Cook county her application for judgment for the award and attorney's fees in accordance with the statute. The application was resisted on the ground that the court was without jurisdiction to render any judgment, because the injury and death occurred outside the state of Illinois, and because certiorari proceedings were pending to review the record of the Industrial Board. It was stipulated that, if the applicant was entitled to attorney's fees at all, she was entitled to $400. The court held...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reed v. Ill. Workers' Comp. Comm'n
...execution of the award, to the end that adequate means may be provided for its enforcement * * *.” Friedman Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial Comm'n, 284 Ill. 554, 558, 120 N.E. 460 (1918). “The purpose of section 19(g) is to permit speedy judgment in cases where there has been a refusal to p......
-
Taylor Coal Co. v. Indus. Comm'n
...the conditions prescribed by the statute have been complied with, so that the jurisdiction may be exercised. In Friedman Mfg. Co. v. Industrial Com., 284 Ill. 554, 120 N. E. 460, it was held that jurisdiction was acquired by the Industrial Board by the application for compensation; that jur......
-
Ahlers v. Sears, Roebuck Co.
...construe the statute (St. Louis Pressed Steel Co. v. Schorr (1922), 303 Ill. 476, 478, 135 N.E. 766; Friedman Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial Com. (1918), 284 Ill. 554, 558, 120 N.E. 460). Especially relevant to the issues presented herein is the Schorr case in which it was held that the ci......
-
Wilson v. Doehler-Jarvis Division of National Lead Co.
...followed in circuit court in the instant case the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in Friedman Manufacturing Company v. Industrial Commission, 284 Ill. 554, 120 N.E. 460, 462, is of interest. The Illinois statute, like that of Michigan, provides for the entering of a judgment in court......