Jakub v. Indus. Comm'n

• Decision Date: 15 April 1919
• Docket Number: No. 12539.,12539.
• Citation: Jakub v. Indus. Comm'n, 288 Ill. 87, 123 N.E. 263 (Ill. 1919)
• Parties: JAKUB v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

288 Ill. 87

123 N.E. 263

JAKUB

v.INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al.

No. 12539.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 15, 1919.

Error to Circuit Court, Cook County; Oscar M. Torrison, Judge.

Proceeding by Eudokia Jakub under the Workmen's Compensation Act for compensation for the death of her husband, John Jakub, opposed by J. Sandrovitz & Co., employer. Denial of award by an arbitrator was filed with the Industrial Commission, and became final as its decision. The finding was confirmed on certiorari to the Circuit Court, and applicant brings error. Affirmed.Isaac Landsberg, of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Truman Henry Miner, of Chicago (Alfred Roy Hulbert, of Chicago, of counsel), for defendant in error.

CARTWRIGHT, J.

Plaintiff in error, Eudokia Jakub, applied to the Industrial Commission for compensation for the death of her husband, John Jakub, while in the employment of defendant in error, J. Sandrovitz & Co. An arbitrator found that Jakub did not sustain accidental injuries arising out of and in the course of his employment, and denied the application. The decision of the arbitrator was filed with the Industrial Commission, and became final as the decision of the commission. Plaintiff in error sued out a writ of certiorari from the circuit court of Cook county, and, a return being made by the commission, the court confirmed the finding, and certified that the case was one proper to be reviewed by this court.

There was no application for a review by the Industrial Commission of the decision of the arbitrator, and the question is presented whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to review the decision. Section 19 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (Hurd's Rev. St. 1917, c. 48, § 144) provides that the decision of the arbitrator shall be filed with the Industrial Commission, which shall send to each party a copy of the decision, and, unless a petition for review is filed by either party within 15 days after the receipt by said party of a copy of the decision, then the decision shall become the decision of the Industrial Commission; that the decision of the Industrial Commission, acting within its powers, and of the arbitrator or committee of arbitration, where no review is had, and his or their decision becomes the decision of the Industrial Commission, shall, in the absence of fraud, be conclusive, unless reviewed as therein provided. The provision for such review is that the circuit court of the county where any of the parties defendant may be found shall, by writ of certiorari to the Industrial Commission, have power to review all questions of law presented by the record. Plaintiff in error did not avail herself of the statutory right to a review of the decision by the Industrial Commission and the privilege of introducing additional evidence upon such review, but permitted the decision of the arbitrator to become final as the decision of the Industrial Commission. By the statute the circuit court was given jurisdiction to review the record by certiorari without the necessity of a review of the decision of the arbitrator by the commission.

On...