Gross v. State

11 Ill. Ct. Cl. 310, 1940 Ill. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 43
CourtCourt of Claims of Illinois
DecidedOctober 9, 1940
DocketNo. 2537
StatusPublished

This text of 11 Ill. Ct. Cl. 310 (Gross v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Claims of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gross v. State, 11 Ill. Ct. Cl. 310, 1940 Ill. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 43 (Ill. Super. Ct. 1940).

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Hollerich

delivered the opinion of the court:

For more than a year prior to July 13, 1934, claimant was employed by the respondent as superintendent of the tailor shop at the Illinois State Penitentiary at Joliet, Illinois. While engaged in the duties of his employment, on the last mentioned date, claimant was brutally assaulted by certain inmates of the institution. He was struck in the jaw with a heavy iron object, knocked down, and rendered unconscious; was kicked, beaten and stabbed; he sustained a compound comminuted fracture of the lower left jaw, and all of his lower teeth were loosened. He also sustained a concussion of the brain, was bruised about the body and legs, sustained an injury to the sciatic nerve of the rig*ht leg, and was so badly beaten about the head, face, neck and chest that he was unrecognizable.

Dr. Frank J. Chmelik, the prison physician, rendered first aid within twenty minutes after the occurrence and had the patient removed to St. Joseph’s Hospital at Joliet, where he remained about three weeks. While in the hospital and afterwards, claimant remained under the care of Dr. Chmelik. He was also treated 'by Dr. Joseph D. Talbot, a practicing dentist, who treated Mm for the trouble with his teeth, mouth and jaw. X-ray pictures of the jaw were taken on the day after the injury, but the swelling was so extensive and the physical condition of the claimant was so bad that it was impossible to do any irrigating of the jaw at that time. On July 17th arch bars were placed on the upper and lower jaws and wired to the teeth, and a head cast placed on the patient. On August 12th, on account of a severe attack of hay fever and asthma, the jaws were pulled loose and had to be rewired, and a new head cast placed, which remained in position until September 12th, when it was removed. Upon the suggestion of his doctors, claimant went to Arizona about October 1, 1934 and remained there for three or four months. On February 15, 1935 he returned to his regular work and worked four days. On March 12, 1936 he again resumed his former employment and continued therein until August 2, 1937. In March, 1937 his teeth were extracted and thereafter temporary and permanent dentures were prepared and fitted by Dr. I. Goldberg, at a cost of $265.00. In the fall of 1937 claimant went to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota for examination, and was advised that his disability was the result of a displaced inter-vertebral disc which' produced pressure upon the nerve, and thereby caused the neurotic condition from which claimant suffered, and that an operation for the removal of such disc should be performed. In preparing him for such operation, the action of the gall bladder was paralyzed, and a preliminary operation on the bladder was required. By reason of such preliminary operation the claimant was not in condition for the operation for the removal of the inter-vertebral disc until March, 1938, when the same was performed.

The operation was a success, the pressure against the nerve was released, and the pain caused by such pressure was eliminated. Claimant’s condition continued to improve, and by July 1, 1938 he was able to perform such work as was usually incident to his previous employment, although at the time of the last hearing herein, to wit, on April 23, 1940, he still had some disability and was required to wear a body brace.

Claimant’s employment was as a superintendent of the tailor shop and his duties were mostly of a supervisory nature. During the two periods after the accident in which he resumed his previous employment, that is, during the four days in February, 1935, and between March 12, 1936 and August 2, 1937, although he performed such duties as were required of him, yet he continued to be disabled as a matter of fact and was finally given a discharge notice on October 7, 1937 for continued absence on account of illness.

Claimant was paid his regular salary of $135.00 per month from the date of his injury to October 1,1934, and was also paid for the four days’ work performed by him in February, 1935, and for the time, he worked between March 12th, 1936 and August 2, 1937.

Claimant seeks to recover compensation for the following items to wit: temporary total incapacity for three separate periods; $265.00 for money paid to Dr. I. Goldberg for dental treatment and dentures; $882.52 for medical, surgical and hospital expenses incurred at the Mayo Clinic; and compensation for serious and permanent disfigurement to the head and face resulting from the permanent loss of teeth.

So far as appears from the record, all medical, surgical and hospital bills other than the bills incurred at the Mayo Clinic as aforesaid, and the aforementioned bill of Dr. Goldberg, have been paid by the respondent.

Although claimant performed the duties required of him during the two periods he worked after his injury, to wit, from February 15th, to February 19, 1935, and from March 12th, 1936 to August 2,1937, yet the testimony shows that during all of the time from the date his injury to July 1,1938, his-nervous condition was bad; he developed a nervous twitching of the facial muscles around the lips; also a sciatic scoliosis of the right side; it was an effort for him to concentrate; his mind did not react quickly; he was restless and did not sleep well at night, and appeared to suffer a large part of the time; in short, he developed a traumatic neurosis. His condition finally became so bad that on October 7, 1937, as previously stated, he was discharged on account of continued absence from duty on account of illness.

In considering a disability resulting from traumatic neurosis, our Supreme Court in the case of Postal Telegraph Co. vs. Ind. Com., 345 Ill. 349, said:

“Whether his disability was caused entirely from the physical blow struck or from a mental condition arising out of the injury makes no difference.”

The same rule was applied in the case of U. S. Fuel Co. vs. Ind. Com., 31 Ill. 590, and in the case of Armour Grain Co. vs. Ind. Com., 323 Ill. 80.

The fact that claimant worked four days in February, 1935, and also worked from March 12, 1936 to October 8, 1937, makes it questionable whether his disability is properly classified as temporary total or permanent.

However, claimant’s disability during the time he was unemployed as aforesaid was total, and it therefore can make no difference under the facts in this case whether the same be classified as temporary or permanent.

From a consideration of all of the facts in the record, we find as follows:

1.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Armour Grain Co. v. Industrial Commission
153 N.E. 699 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1926)
Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. Industrial Commission
178 N.E. 187 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 Ill. Ct. Cl. 310, 1940 Ill. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 43, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gross-v-state-ilclaimsct-1940.