Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Clifford Frane v. State of Illinois

12 Ill. Ct. Cl. 300 Illinois Court of Claims Filed November 10, 1942. No. 3733
Disposition: (No. 3 7 3 3 4 l a i m a n t awarded $314.08.) Award: $314.08 Agency: Division of Highways, Department of Public Works and Buildings
Cite as: Clifford Frane v. State of Illinois, 12 Ill. Ct. Cl. 300 (1942)
Legacy General 12 awarded Clifford Frane v. State of Illinois 12 Ill. Ct. Cl. 300 November 10, 1942. (No. 3 7 3 3 4 l a i m a n t awarded $314.08.) /opinions/v12-p0317-1/

’ CLIFFORD FRANE, Claimant, as. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought workers' compensation for permanent partial disability to two fingers. The court found the injury arose out of and in the course of employment and awarded $314.08, including a 10% increase under Section 8, Subsection L.

Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence

Statutes cited: Section 24 of the Workmen's Compensation Act; Section 8, Subsection E, paragraphs 4, 5 and 17; Section 8, Subsection L

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

Headnotes

  1. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION -wr-when azoard f w compensation m a y be icnder for partial loss of u s e of fingers. Where employee of State’ sustains accidental injuries, arising out of and in the course of his employment, while engaged in a n extra-hazardous enterprise as defined in the Workmen’s Compensation Act, resulting in partial loss of use of fingers, a n award -may be made f o r compensation therefor in accordance with the provisions of said Act, upon compliance by said employee with the requirements thereof and proper’proof of claim for same.

[*301] This claim was filed July 22, 1942. It is for benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act claimed by claimant for the loss of the first phalange of the third finger and the loss of the first phalange on the fourth or little finger of the left hand. The claim is based on injuries alleged to have arisen out of and in the course of claimant’s employment as a mechanic’s helper for the Division of Highways, Department of Public Works and Buildings.

The complaint alleges that claimant, while engaged in removing a snow plow frame from under a truck, was injured when the frame accidently dropped from the truck f r we , amputating the first phalange of the third and fourth fingers of his left hand.

It is further alleged that claimant was given first aid treatment at St. Joseph’s Hospital, Joliet, Illinois, and was returned to the Sherman Hospital, Elgin, Illinois, for additional hospitahzation. - It is further alleged that claimant was employed for forty-one (41) consecutive weeks by the State of Illinois prior to the date of the injury, and that during said time‘he received the total of One Thousand One Hundred Ten and 48J100 Dollars ($1,110.48) as wage‘s from the State of Illinois.

That the claimant has been paid compensation for one and three-sevenths weeks, amounting to Twenty-one and 17J100 Dollars ($21.17).

Complaint further alleges that claimant is entitled to compensation in the sum of Three Hundred Thirty-five and l2/100 Dollars ($335.12).

The record of the case consists of the complaint, report of the Division of Highways of the State of Illinois, and brief . 1 and argument filed on behalf of respondent.

The accident for which this claim is filed occurred on March 19, 1942. Notice of the same was given to responaent on the date it occurred and claim was filed on July 22, 1942.

The provisions of Section 24 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act having been complied with, this court has jurisdiction thereof.

It appears from the report of the Division of Highways that the claimant was engaged in routine duty when the frame which he was removing from the bottom of the truck fell, crushing the fingers on his left hand, and that the injury arose during his normal working hours and while hei was on [*302] duty. From the record, it thus appears that claimant’s accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. It also appears from the record and, in accordance with the report of Dr. Partridge of the Sherman Hospital, that claimant suffered permanent disability, namely, loss of terminal phalanx of fourth finger of left hand a-nd two-thirds (2/3) of terminal phalanx of little finger. The record also shows that the medical and hospital bills, incurred because of the injury to claimant, have been paid for by respondent, and that claimant has also received payment for his temporary total disability.

This court is of the opinion that claimant has suffered fifty (50) per cent loss of the use of his third finger, also fifty (50) per cent loss of the use of his fourth finger. In accordance with the record, his average weekly wage would be computed at Twenty-five and 38/100 Dollars ($25.38). Under Section 8, Subsection E, paragraphs 4, 5 and 17, claimant would be entitled to fifty (50) per cent of $25.38, or $12.69 weekly for 1Zyz weeks for partial permanent injury to his third finger, or a total of $158.63, and would be entitled to $12.69 for 10 weeks or $126.90 for partial permanent injury to his fourth finger, making a total of $285.53, which said amount is increased ten (10) per cent by Subsection L of Section 8, making total award to which he is entitled $314.08.

Award is, therefore, entered in favor of claimant for the said sum of Three Hundred Fourteen and 08/100 Dollars ($314.08), all of which is accrued and is payable forthwith.

This award being subject to the provisions of an Act entitled “An Act Making an Appropriation to Pay Compensation Claims of State Employees and Providing for the Method of Payment Thereof,’’ approved June 30, 1941, and beifig by the terms of such Act, subject to the approval of the Governor, is hereby, if and when approval is given, made - payable from the appropriation from the Road Fund in the manner provided for in such Act.

Official volume 12 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion between: July 1, 1941–June 30, 1943)  ·  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.