FRANZ RYDELL, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant sought compensation for injuries allegedly sustained when struck by an automobile while working for the Division of Highways. The court denied the claim because the only evidence of injury was the claimant's own statement, and a physician testified he was physically capable of heavy work, so the court could not base an award on conjecture.
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT-proof necessary to obtain award. Employee of State seeking compensation for injuries must show that such injuries were accidental, that they arose out of and in course of employment while engaged in extra hazardous employment, that same incapacitated him from work and for what period of time.
- SAME-when no award will be made. Where claimant fails to introduce any evidence of injury, except his own statement, which is contradicted by physician called by him and fails to show that he was incapacitated for work and if so, for what length of time an award will be denied.
Claimant charges in his declaration that while he was working for the Division of Highways on August 12, 1930, an automobile, driven by Mrs. Alice Cryderman, struck him knocking him into one of the barricades on the pavement, and as a result thereof his back was wrenched, his left leg bruised and he suffered a nervous shock. The proof does show that Mrs. Cryderman's car struck him, but there is no evidence, other than his own statement, that he was injured thereby. A physician called by him testified that he is a person "of low mentality, below normal," and that such condition was not the result of the accident. He also testified that the claimant was physically capable of doing heavy work. While an employee of the State who is injured and whose injury arose out of and in the course of his employment is entitled to compensation for such injuries, the compensation to be paid depends upon whether the injury incapacitated him from work and, if so, what length of time. The employee must introduce evidence showing he is entitled to compensation and for what length of time. This claimant has failed to do. As the court cannot base award upon conjecture the claim is denied and the case dismissed.