{
  "id": 2856640,
  "name": "Ronald Friend, d/b/a Farmer Friend Elevator et al., Appellee, vs. The Industrial Commission et al.-(John C. Pratt, Sr., Appellant.)",
  "name_abbreviation": "Friend v. Industrial Commission",
  "decision_date": "1968-05-29",
  "docket_number": "No. 41012",
  "first_page": "79",
  "last_page": "81",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "40 Ill. 2d 79"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "36 Ill.2d 272",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5378116
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/36/0272-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 236,
    "char_count": 2947,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.787,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0802361123033605e-07,
      "percentile": 0.562308265848704
    },
    "sha256": "8ed3b1fc8841826656260c7a1cfc2224a50a32089ed6ce2401a9f5b702d40e48",
    "simhash": "1:cf0ca245790de09f",
    "word_count": 510
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:25:19.955276+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ronald Friend, d/b/a Farmer Friend Elevator et al., Appellee, vs. The Industrial Commission et al.\u2014(John C. Pratt, Sr., Appellant.)"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Klingbiel\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nJohn C. Pratt, Sr. appeals from a judgment of the circuit court of Sangamon County setting aside his workmen\u2019s compensation award. The issue is whether he was within the scope of covered employment at the time of injury.\nHe was employed by Ronald Friend, d/b/a Farmer\u2019s Friend Grain and Sales Company located at Kilbourne, in Mason County. He worked at the grain elevator dumping or hauling grain, shelling corn, running the auger and the like. In February, 1964, after he had completed wrecking work on a corn crib, he was directed to go to certain timber land on a farm owned by his employer and cut up some trees for fence posts. It was while he was so engaged that he was injured, when a tree being cut with a chain saw went out of control.\nThe employer points to section 3 of the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act, which is entitled \u201cAutomatic application of act\u201d and provides in part that nothing in the act shall be construed to apply to work done on a farm. (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1963, chap. 48, par. 138.3.) He contends that Pratt was excluded from the provisions of the Act because at the time of injury he was engaged in farm work and not in his employer\u2019s usual course of business.\nWe cannot accept the contention. The evidence shows that for years Pratt had frequently been sent to do tasks on his employer\u2019s farm when he was not busy at the grain elevators, and that his compensation was always in one weekly check covering the work done at both the elevator business and the farm. It is not disputed that Pratt went from his grain elevator duties to the tree-cutting work at the direction of his employer, and there is little doubt that he was in no position to refuse.\nSection 1 of the Act, in defining \u201cemployee,\u201d excludes \u201cany person who is not engaged in the usual course of the trade, business, profession or ocupation of his employer\u201d but by amendment in 1963 there was added the phrase \u201cunless he is so engaged at the lawful direction or instruction of his employer.\u201d (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1963, chap. 48. par. 138.1.) Pratt\u2019s injuries were sustained subsequent to this amendment, and while he was engaged in work which his employer directed him to perform. Even aside from the force of the amendment, the circumstances of this case show that the work being performed at the time was so enmeshed with the usual business of the employer as to make the injuries compensable. Fleming Washer Service v. Industrial Com., 36 Ill.2d 272.\nThe circuit court erred in setting aside the award. The judgment is reversed and the award reinstated.\nJudgment reversed; award reinstated.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Klingbiel"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Anthony J. Manuele and Frank S. Calandrino, both of Springfield, by appellant.",
      "Gilliespie, Burice & Gillespie, of Springfield, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 41012.\nRonald Friend, d/b/a Farmer Friend Elevator et al., Appellee, vs. The Industrial Commission et al.\u2014(John C. Pratt, Sr., Appellant.)\nOpinion filed May 29, 1968.\nAnthony J. Manuele and Frank S. Calandrino, both of Springfield, by appellant.\nGilliespie, Burice & Gillespie, of Springfield, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0079-01",
  "first_page_order": 95,
  "last_page_order": 97
}