County of Christian v. Industrial Commission
Illinois Supreme Court
1DissentJustice Gunn
I disagree with the conclusion reached by the majority in this case. The respondent was admittedly an employee of the county through its operation of the administration of a fund to give care and treatment to persons afflicted with turberculosis. There is no denial she was accidentally injured. The majority opinion reaches the conclusion the respondent is not entitled to compensation because she was not engaged in any enterprise declared to be extra-hazardous in section 3 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1945, chap. 48, par. 139.
There can be no question that the business of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Illinois Publishing & Printing Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1921
- J. E. Porter Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1921
- Ascher Bros. Amusement Enterprises v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
- Forest Preserve District of Cook County v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1934
- Marshall Field & Co. v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1922
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.