Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

George Winters v. State of Illinois

6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 544 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1931-05-14 No. 1639
Disposition: (No. 1639-Claimant awarded $98.00.) Award: $98.00
Cite as: George Winters v. State of Illinois, 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 544 (1931)
Legacy General 6 awarded 1930s George Winters v. State of Illinois 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 544 1931-05-14 (No. 1639-Claimant awarded $98.00.) /opinions/v06-p0573-1/

GEORGE WINTERS, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought damages for a foot injury sustained while removing a steel drag from a truck during road work. The court found the claim fell under the Workmen's Compensation Act and awarded $98.00 as recommended by the Attorney General.

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 Compensation Act. Where claimant receives injuries in course of employment while working upon a hard road, an award will be made under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

This is a claim to recover damages while actually engaged in grading and scraping the roadway in building up shoulders on S. B. I. Route No. 31 about two miles west of Mount Sterling, Illinois. On October 5th, 1929, claimant was engaged in removing a steel road drag from the top of a truck loaded with waste pieces or blocks of cement. In so doing a large piece of cement slipped down claimant's right leg and struck his toe, mashing the same. This piece of cement weighed approximately 100 pounds.

The Attorney General comes and defends and admits that if there is any liability it should be in the sum of $98.00. The court feels that this case comes under the Workmen's Compensation Act and, therefore, recommends that claimant be awarded the sum of $98.00.

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.