Wellman-Lord, Inc. v. Industrial Commission

• Decision Date: 27 May 1971
• Docket Number: WELLMAN-LOR,No. 43428,INC,43428
• Citation: 271 N.E.2d 881,48 Ill.2d 533
• Parties: , Appellee, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. Appeal of William Plummer LONG.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 881

271 N.E.2d 881

48 Ill.2d 533

WELLMAN-LORD, INC., Appellee, v. The INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. Appeal of William Plummer LONG.

No. 43428.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 27, 1971.

Perona & Perona, Spring Valley, for appellant.

Anthony C. Raccuglia, La Salle, for appellee.

WARD, Justice.

This case is an appeal from two orders of the circuit court of La Salle County, both of which were rendered pursuant to a writ of Certiorari to the Industrial Commission of Illinois. They have been consolidated for review in this court. The claimant, William Plummer Long, on October 14, 1966, filed an application for adjustment of claim of an employment-related injury. An arbitrator after hearing evidence entered an award for medical expenses in the amount of $194.65, for 35 2/7 weeks of temporary incapacity, and for 10% Loss of use of the left leg. On review the Industrial Commission ordered an award for the same amount of medical expenses and temporary total incapacity but entered an award for permanent partial incapacity under section 8(d) of the Workmen's Compensation Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1969, ch. 48, par. 138.8(d)) in place of the award for loss of use under section 8(e) of the Act (par. 138.8(e)) which had been granted by the arbitrator. The circuit court on writ of Certiorari reversed the Commission's award on the ground that it was against the manifest weight of the evidence. On remandment, the Industrial Commission after taking additional evidence entered a new award identical to its original award for medical expenses and temporary total incapacity, but enlarged to 20% Of the loss of use of the left leg. This award was affirmed by the circuit court. The order of remandment by the Circuit Court and its order affirming the later award are challenged in this appeal by the petitioner.

The circuit court's first order remanding the case to the Commission was interlocutory and could not be appealed by the petitioner. (See South Chicago Community Hospital v. Industrial Comm., 44 Ill.2d 119, 254 N.E.2d 448; Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago v. Industrial Comm., 37 Ill.2d 447, 227 N.E.2d 762; Mayrath Co. v. Industrial Comm., 33 Ill.2d 224, 210 N.E.2d 529.) However, as we said in Downey v. Industrial Comm., 44 Ill.2d 28 at p. 29, 253 N.E.2d 371 at p. 372: '* * * the circuit court's final judgment confirming the Commission's award, made pursuant to the remand, is properly presented for appeal. The entire record is before this court in the present appeal, and the correctness of the circuit court's initial decision to reverse and remand may now be reviewed within the context of the court's final judgment. (ACF Industries, Inc. v. Industrial Comm., 8 Ill.2d 552, 554, 134 N.E.2d 764; Northwestern University v. Industrial Comm., 409 Ill. 216, 219, 99 N.E.2d 18; American Manganese Steel Co. v. Industrial Comm., 399 Ill. 272, 274--275, 77 N.E.2d 689.) It is therefore proper for this court to review the evidence upon which the arbitrator and the Commission based the original decision * * * and we must determine whether the circuit court was correct in finding that decision to be against the manifest weight of the evidence. Gray Knox Marble Co. v. Industrial Comm., 363 Ill. 210, 2 N.E.2d 60.' Thus, we may consider the correctness of the court's order of remandment.

While the record shows that the Commission's first award for permanent partial incapacity was rendered only on the basis of the transcript of the evidence presented to the arbitrator and on oral argument before the Commission, there was no impropriety in this, as we have consistently held that the Commission exercises original jurisdiction and is no way bound by the arbitrator's findings. J. J. Grady Company, Inc. v. Industrial Comm., 46 Ill.2d 471, 263 N.E.2d 809; American Smelting and refining Corp. v. Industrial Comm., 13 Ill.2d 275, 148 N.E.2d 751.

A review of the record on which the Commission's award for permanent partial incapacity was based persuades us that the Commission's award was not clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence and must be upheld. Overland Construction Co. v. Industrial Comm., 37 Ill.2d 525, 531, 229 N.E.2d 500.

The evidence at the hearing before the arbitrator showed that on September 23, 1966, the day of the accident, William Plummer Long, was working as an iron worker for Wellman-Lord, the respondent, near Depue, Illinois. Long testified that he had worked steadily in the construction field since 1960, engaging mainly in construction painting and steeple jacking. At the time of his injury, he had been in a kneeling position, tying structural steel in place. While bent over at the waist he was struck in the back by a piece of steel, which he estimated weighed about 150 pounds. He testified: 'All of a sudden I got hit above the belt line on my back; it was real abrupt; it was like a shot, like somebody hit you with a sledge hammer. I was shaking all over after being hit.' He attempted to resume work but experienced dizziness and pain in the hip region and lower legs. After about 30 minutes, he informed his foreman of the accident and visited the company nurse, who directed him to a Dr. Simonetta's office. There he was referred to St. Margaret's Hospital for the taking of X rays. He returned to work, but, he said, experienced severe pains in his hip and legs for the remainder of the day. He testified that after the accident he continued under Dr. Simonetta's care, receiving medication as well as therapy treatments. The therapy treatments, he said, were administered every day for the first four or five days and then a couple of times per week for another two weeks until approximately the middle of October of 1966.

The claimant said that he continued to work, despite constant pain in his lower back and legs, until October 11, 1966, when his employment was terminated by the respondent. He also continued to receive treatment from Dr. Simonetta and on November 21, 1966, he entered St. Margaret's Hospital at the physician's recommendation. He was placed in traction for six days and then released on November 29. Several days after returning home he again experienced pain in the lower back and legs. He visited Dr. Simonetta a couple of times in December of 1966 and was referred to a neurologist, whom he visited on two occasions. Sometime in...