Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

John Bennett v. State of Illinois

6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 563 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1931-05-14 No. 1706
Disposition: (No. 1706-Claimant awarded $273.50.) Award: $273.50 Agency: Illinois Waterway
Cite as: John Bennett v. State of Illinois, 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 563 (1931)
Legacy General 6 awarded 1930s John Bennett v. State of Illinois 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 563 1931-05-14 (No. 1706-Claimant awarded $273.50.) /opinions/v06-p0592-1/

JOHN BENNETT, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, a laborer on the Dresden Island Project, suffered an inguinal hernia in a work accident. The court found the injury arose out of and in the course of employment, awarded 11 weeks of compensation at $27 per week plus $125 in unpaid medical bills, totaling $273.50.

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

  1. PERSONAL INJURY-when award will be made-Workmen's Compensation Act. Where claimant sustains injuries arising out of and in the course of employment while working for the State, an award will be made under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act.

Claimant was employed by the State as a laborer on Dresden Island Project No. 3 of the Illinois Waterway. On December 14, 1929, he was injured while at his work, which injury was found to be an inguinal hernia. The injury arose out of and in the course of his employment. He was operated on for the hernia and fully recovered. He was earning $27.00 per week and is entitled to compensation for 11 weeks. His physician's bill was $125.00 which was not paid by the State. He is therefore awarded the sum of $273.50, the amount of those two items.

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.