Peru Plow & Wheel Co. v. Industrial Commission
Illinois Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stone
Defendant in error, Arthur Rouso, filed a claim with the Industrial Commission for compensation for injuries arising out of an accident alleged to have occurred in his employment with plaintiff in error. There is no controversy as to the relations of the parties, the questions in dispute being whether or not there was an accident, whether notice was given as required by law, and the nature and extent of the disability. No testimony was offered on behalf of plaintiff in error either before the arbitrator or before the commission on review, it being contended by it that the disability of Rouso…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Matthiessen & Hegeler Zinc Co. v. Industrial BoardIllinois Supreme Court · 1918
- United Paperboard Co. v. LewisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1917
- E. Baggot Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1919
- City of Joliet v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1920
- Chicago Rawhide Manufacturing Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Canadian Radium & Uranium Corp. v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaIllinois Supreme Court · 1952
- Glodenis v. American Brass Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- St. Louis Mining & Smelting Co. v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Ervin v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1936
- Nolan v. Johns-Manville Asbestos & Magnesia Materials Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1979
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.