Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Industrial Commission

The award being reviewed by this writ of error is for the loss .of the sight of an eye. It is admitted that this award would be correct if it were not for the fact that defendant in error has received compensation for the permanent loss of ninety per cent of the use of the same eye resulting from another injury incurred three years before while in the employ of the same company. Plaintiff in error contends that because only ten per cent of vision remained its liability is limited to a payment for the loss of that fraction.

Item 16 of paragraph (e) of section 8 of the Workmen’s Compensation act…