Case ID: ill-app_200/html/0045-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James J. Ryan, Appellee, v. Chicago Foundry Company, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 21,398.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Workmen’s Compensation Act—when award signed by two of three arbitrators sufficient. Under section 10 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (J. & A. T 5459), and section 1 of the act as to statutory construction (J. & A. f 11102), an award of the arbitrators which is signed by only two of the three arbitrators appointed under the Workmen’s Compensation Act is valid.
    
      Appeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March .term, 1915.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed July 20, 1916.
    Statement of the Case.
    Assumpsit by James J. Ryan, plaintiff, against Chicago Foundry Company, a corporation, defendant, based upon an award made for plaintiff against defendant under the Workman’s Compensation Act of 1911 (J. & A. ti 5449 et seq.), which was signed by only two of the three arbitrators appointed thereunder. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Eastman & White, for appellant.
    Gorman, Pollock, Sullivan & Livingston, for appellee.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section nutnber.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Courts, § 100 —when County Court has jurisdiction of assumpsit on award. The County Court has jurisdiction of a suit in assumpsit based on an award for less than $1,000.

3. Assumpsit, action of, § 6 —when proper remedy on an award. Assumpsit is a proper remedy on an award.

4. Workmen’s Compensation Act—when evidence as to liability of employer properly excluded in assumpsit on award. In a suit in assumpsit based on an award made under the Workmen’s Compensation Act (J. & A. 1[ 5449 et seq.), evidence bearing on the question of defendant’s liability under such act is properly excluded as irrelevant.