Saxton v. Industrial Commission

223 N.E.2d 137, 36 Ill. 2d 453, 1967 Ill. LEXIS 467
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 19, 1967
Docket40140
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 223 N.E.2d 137 (Saxton v. Industrial Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Saxton v. Industrial Commission, 223 N.E.2d 137, 36 Ill. 2d 453, 1967 Ill. LEXIS 467 (Ill. 1967).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Underwood

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Winnebago County sustaining the Industrial Commission’s affirmance of a workmen’s compensation award.

The facts are undisputed. On September 27, 1964, claimant Carl Nelson Powell, then a tenth-grade student employed part time by a Texaco gas station, while driving his car in the course of his employment collided with another car, sustaining a fracture of the occipital bone of the skull and fractures of both the right and left mandibles (jaw bones). Claimant was permitted to return to school on October 30, 1964, but was told by his doctor not to participate in athletic events and therefore took a modified physical education course. He completed the school year ending June 7, 1965, and was released to return to work by his treating physician on June 14, 1965. He has since been employed.

The arbitrator awarded claimant temporary total disability payments for the period from September 27, 1964, to June 7, 1965, and further allowed 60 weeks compensation for the skull fracture and an additional 20 weeks for the fractured mandibles.

Section 8(d) of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1963, chap. 48, par. 138.8(d) contains the controlling statutory provisions and is as follows:

“(d) If, after the accidental injury has been sustained, the employee as a result thereof becomes partially incapacitated from pursuing his usual and customary line of employment, he shall, except in the cases covered by the specific schedule set forth in paragraph (e) of this Section, receive compensation, subject to the limitations as to time and maximum amounts fixed in paragraphs (b) and (h) of this Section, equal to 65 % of the difference between the average amount which he earned before the accident and the average amount which he is earning or is able to earn in some suitable employment or business after the accident.
“Such percentum of 65% shall be increased in the following cases to the following percentages:
70% in case of 1 such child;
75 % in the case of 2 such children;
80% in the case of 3 or more such children.
“If no compensation is awarded under the foregoing provisions of this paragraph, and when an accidental injury has been sustained which results in a fracture or fractures of the body or bodies of one or more vertebrae, compensation shall be allowed for an aggregate period of 60 weeks in addition to compensation for temporary total disability, such compensation to be in lieu of all compensation specified hereinbefore by this paragraph; provided, however, that no compensation may be allowed for fractured vertebrae or fractured skull where there is awarded compensation for specific loss or loss of use of a member or members caused in whole or in part by such vertebral injury or fractured skull; provided further that the surgical removal of a part of a vertebra or fracture of the coccyx shall not constitute a fractured vertebra within the meaning of this paragraph. If no compensation is awarded for loss of earnings as hereinbefore provided under the provisions of the preceding paragraph, and no compensation is awarded for a fracture of a body of a vertebra, and when an accidental injury has been sustained which results in a fracture or fractures to the skull, compensation shall be allowed for an aggregate period of 60 weeks in addition to compensation for temporary total disability. The term ‘fracture or fractures of the skull’ as used in this paragraph means, and is limited to, fracture or fractures of the bones enclosing the cranial cavity. If no compensation is awarded for loss of earnings, as hereinbefore provided under the provisions of the preceding paragraph, and an accidental injury has been sustained which results in a fracture or fractures of the following facial bones: nasal, lachrymal, vomer, zygoma, maxilla, palatine or mandible; compensation shall be allowed for an aggregate period up to 20 weeks in addition to compensation for temporary total incapacity.”

Appellant initially maintains that the circuit court erred in its construction of the statute when it allowed an award to stand which grants 60 weeks compensation for a skull fracture and an additional 20 weeks for fractures of both mandibles where both injuries arise out of the same accident. It is argued that section 8(d) does not authorize such an award, and if it does, the statute violates the equal-protection clause of the 14th amendment to the United States constitution and section 22 of article IV of the Illinois constitution as being arbitrary and capricious.

In Sampson v. Industrial Com. 33 Ill.2d 301, the claimant had sustained fractures of his skull and the body of a vertebra in a work-connected accidental injury. The there pertinent language of section 8(d) is as follows: “If * * * no compensation is awarded for a fracture of a body of a vertebra, and when an accidental injury has been sustained which results in a fracture or fractures to the skull, compensation shall be allowed for an aggregate period of 60 weeks in addition to compensation for temporary total disability.” (Emphasis ours.) It was thus clear that section 8(d) does not contemplate the allowance of compensation for a period of 60 weeks for a vertebral body fracture and also an additional 60 weeks compensation for a skull fracture, where both injuries are contemporaneously sustained. We held that the General Assembly could reasonably limit the aggregate period of compensation to 60 weeks for an injury resulting in fractures of both the skull and the body of a vertebra, reasoning as follows (33 Ill.2d at pages 303-04) :

“It will * * * be noted that the provisions for 60-weeks compensation are unrelated to the employee’s ability to work or the severity of the fracture. If he sustains a fracture of either the body óf a vertebra or the skull, or both, neither of which result in loss of earning power he, nevertheless, would be compensated for 60 weeks. On the other hand, if he has a more severe fracture of either or both for which a 60-week benefit would be insufficient, he would be entitled to an award based upon his decreased earning power in lieu of the 60-week provision. Under such circumstances we cannot say that there is discrimination against an employee who suffers fractures of both members and is limited to compensation for 60 rather than 120 weeks. The legislature could reasonably conclude that the fracture of a body of a vertebra and a skull fracture, in the absence of decrease in earning power, should not be eligible for more compensation than that payable for either of the injuries alone. It has wide discretion in the exercise of the police power and absolute- uniformity of treatment for injuries is impossible. The limiting of awards has been recognized and approved by this court. For example, in Wargo v. Industrial Com. 31 Ill.2d 143, we held that where compensation was allowed for fracture of a maxillary sinus the legislature could prohibit awards for disfigurement of that area of the face.”

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

Related

R. C. Mahon Co. v. Industrial Commission
259 N.E.2d 274 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1970)
City of Chicago v. Pennsylvania Railroad
242 N.E.2d 152 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
223 N.E.2d 137, 36 Ill. 2d 453, 1967 Ill. LEXIS 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saxton-v-industrial-commission-ill-1967.