ELLEN KELL, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES T. KELL, Deceased, CLAIMANT, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

The claimant, as administratrix of the estate of James T. Kell, sought compensation for his death while employed as an automobile investigator for the State of Illinois. The court found that the injuries occurred in the line of duty and that the Workmen's Compensation Act applied, awarding $3,750.00.

Claim type: Line Of Duty Death

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

Headnotes

PERSONAL INJURY-when award will be made. Where it appears that

PERSONAL INJURY-when award will be made. Where it appears that claimant's intestate received injuries in line of duty which resulted in death while employed as an automobile investigator for the State, an award will be made and the amount determined in accordance with the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. L. P. HARRIS, for claimant. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; ROY D. JOHNSON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE CLARITY delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a claim brought by Ellen Kell as administratrix of the estate of James T. Kell, deceased. It appearing from [*392] allegations of claimant that the said deceased was employed as an automobile investigator for the State of Illinois; that while in the performance of his duties on State Highway Route No. 2 North of DuQuoin, Illinois, and while passing an automobile the motorcycle on which he was riding collided with a telephone pole causing his left leg to be broken and internal injuries from which he died on July 26th, 1929, the accident happening on July 24th, 1929. There appears to be no contradiction that said Kell sustained the injuries complained of while in the employ of the State of Illinois and that his mother, the complaining administratrix was dependent upon him for support. Therefore the only question to be considered is the amount of an award. There appears to be no objection as to this contention on the part of the defendant and it would appear that the Workmen's Compensation Act would prevail.

It is therefore recommended that complainant be allowed the sum of Three Thousand, Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($3,750.00).