Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Industrial Commission

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1934No. 22199. Reversed and remandedPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stone

Pat Murphy, while discharging the duties of policeman in the city of Herrin, was shot in the hand. He made application for compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation act. The arbitrator, on hearing, found that Murphy was not entitled to compensation, for the reason that he was an officer and not an employee of the city of Herrin. On review this finding was confirmed by the commission. On certiorari to the circuit court of Williamson county the finding of the commission was set aside and the court on examination of the evidence in the case entered an award.

There are two questions in the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bullis v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Stott v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
  3. City of Metropolis v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1930

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Krawiec v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Nolan v. WitkowskiNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1959
  3. Sweeney v. City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 1971
  4. City of Danville v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Village of Streamwood Police Department v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1974

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API