Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Metts v. State of Illinois

6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 513 Illinois Court of Claims Filed April 16, 1931 No. 1696
Disposition: (No. 1696-Claimant awarded $1,825.00.) Award: $1,825.00
Cite as: Metts v. State of Illinois, 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 513 (1931)
Legacy General 6 awarded 1930s Metts v. State of Illinois 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 513 April 16, 1931 (No. 1696-Claimant awarded $1,825.00.) /opinions/v06-p0542-2/

EDMUND JOHN METTS, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, a state employee in an extra hazardous occupation, suffered serious injuries including compound fractures and lacerations arising out of and in the course of employment. The court awarded him $1,825.00 in compensation.

Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence

AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.

Headnotes

  1. PERSONAL INJURY-when award will be made-Workmen's Compensa- OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE- & SAVINGS BANK, 1038-1713; SAMUEL G. HARRIS, 1071, Claim- ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION-No further finding of facts, but court per- OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

Claimant was employed by the State in a business declared by the Workmen's Compensation Act to be extra hazardous.

And on August 28, 1930, while so employed was seriously injured. He had a compound fracture of both bones in his left leg, a compound fracture of his left wrist and a multiple fracture of his ribs and was otherwise bruised and lacerated.

The injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment, and the State is liable to compensate him for them.

His hospital and physician's bills amounted to $697.50. He has recovered from all the injuries except the one to his leg, and we have decided that he should be allowed compensation in the sum of $1,825.00. It is therefore ordered that claimant be and he is awarded the sum of $1,825.00.

Official volume 6 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed between July 1, 1927–June 30, 1931)  ·  All opinions in this volume  ·  Also on CourtListener

This text is OCR/derived from the official volume and may contain errors. The PDF is authoritative. Boundary pages shared with the adjacent opinion are reproduced whole, so the page image may show a neighbor's opening or closing lines; the transcript text itself is opinion-scoped. See About & sources.