Legacy General 6 awarded 1930s Ansbro v. State of Illinois 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 535 1931-05-14 (No. 1689-Claimant awarded $382.71.) /opinions/v06-p0564-1/ PATRICK ANSBRO, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant, a structural iron worker, was injured during his employment on the Brandon Road Pool project. The court awarded him additional compensation of $382.71 based on the parties' stipulation.
Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence
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-Workmen's Compensation
PERSONAL INJURY-when award will be made-Workmen's Compensation Act. Where it appears that claimant was employed as a structural iron worker upon the Illinois Waterway and it is stipulated that he received injuries arising out of and in the course of his employment, an award will be made and the amount determined under the Workmen's Compensation Act. BERNARD L. KELLY, for claimant.
OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; CARL I. DIETZ, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
MR. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the court:
Claimant was employed by the State as a structural iron worker on Brandon Road Pool, being project No. 6 of the Illinois Waterway. It has been stipulated by the parties that claimant was injured on June 27, 1929, and that his injury arose out of and in the course of his employment, that the State furnished claimant medical, surgical and hospital treatment for three months and paid him compensation at the rate of $19.00 a week for five and one-half weeks. It is conceded that claimant is entitled to be paid $19.00 a week for twenty and one-seventh weeks in addition to payments he has already received. He is therefore awarded the sum of $382.71.
Official volume 6 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed between July 1, 1927–June 30, 1931)
·
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.