Legal Opinion

Riley v. Industrial Commission

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided April 10, 1991No. 3-89-0713WCPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRESIDING JUSTICE BARRY

delivered the opinion of the court:

An arbitrator found that the injuries sustained by the petitioner, Thomas Riley, did not arise out of and in the course of his employment with the respondent, Joseph D. Foreman Company. The Industrial Commission (Commission) affirmed the arbitrator’s decision, and the circuit court confirmed the Commission’s decision. The petitioner appeals.

At the hearing before the arbitrator, the petitioner testified that on January 19, 1984, he was working for the respondent selling water and sewer materials. That morning he called on some of his…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Paganelis v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1989
  2. District 141, International Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace Workers v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Fire King Oil Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Glover v. Industrial CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  5. Panagos v. Industrial CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1988

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Parro v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Lock 26 Constructors v. Industrial CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1993
  3. Parro v. Industrial CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1993
  4. Kropp Forge Co. v. Industrial CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1992
  5. Chicago Housing Authority v. Industrial CommissionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1993

2 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