N.K. Fairbank Co. v. Indus. Comm'n of Illinois

• Decision Date: 21 October 1918
• Docket Number: No. 11830.,11830.
• Citation: 120 N.E. 457,285 Ill. 11
• Parties: N. K. FAIRBANK CO. v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

285 Ill. 11

120 N.E. 457

N. K. FAIRBANK CO.

v.INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS et al.

No. 11830.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 21, 1918.

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

Proceedings before the Industrial Commission by Rose A. McGuire, administratrix, for compensation for the death of Michael McGuire, employé. To review a judgment of the circuit court, confirming a decision and award of the Industrial Commission, the N. K. Fairbank Company, employer, brings error. Reversed and remanded.

Brode B. Davis, of Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Ditchburne & Westberg, of Chicago, for defendant in error.

COOKE, J.

This is a writ of error to review the judgment of the circuit court of Cook county confirming the decision and award of the Industrial Board. Claim was made by Rose McGuire, as administratrix, for compensation for the death of Michael McGuire, which resulted from an injury received by him on September 21, 1915, and which it is alleged arose out of and in the course of his employment with the N. K. Fairbank Company, plaintiff in error.

At the time of his death the deceased was in the employ of the plaintiff in error as weigher and receiver in its plant at Wentworth avenue and Eighteenth street, in the city of Chicago. In the performance of his duties he was occasionally required to visit the plants of others than plaintiff in error for the purpose of inspecting fats offered for sale to the plaintiff in error and obtaining samples of the same. The factory of plaintiff in error, where the deceased performed his work as weigher and receiver, closed at 6 o'clock p. m. On the day on which he was injured the deceased was sent to the plant of Darling & Co., in Chicago, to procure samples of fat. It was his custom on such occasions, if he could obtain the samples in time, to return to the plant of the plaintiff in error before 6 o'clock p. m.; but, if he could not finish his inspection and obtain the samples in time to return to the plant before closing time, he would bring the samples to the plant of plaintiff in error the following morning. On the day of the accident the deceased completed his inspection of the samples and left the plant of Darling & Co. about 7:15 or 7:20 o'clock p. m., carrying a small pail containing tallow with him. After leaving the plant of Darling & Co. he walked about two blocks to the corner of Forty-Second street and Ashland avenue, where he was struck and killed by a street car about 7.40 or 7:45 o'clock p. m. He was seen by several witnesses between the time he left the plant of Darling & Co. and the time when he was struck by the street car, and an effort was made on the part of plaintiff in error to show that at the time he was struck by the street car he did not have in his possession the pail of tallow which he took with him when he left the plant of Darling & Co. In our view of the case it is immaterial whether or not he had left the pail of tallow with some friend in that locality until he should return for it on the following morning, or whether he still had it in his possession at the time he was killed. The deceased had finished his work for the day and was on his way to his home at the time...