{ "id": 2608529, "name": "HELEN BEELER, Appellant, v. THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. (Sherwin Williams, Appellee)", "name_abbreviation": "Beeler v. Industrial Commission", "decision_date": "1989-01-18", "docket_number": "No. 5\u201488\u20140307WC", "first_page": "463", "last_page": "467", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "179 Ill. App. 3d 463" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.", "id": 8837, "name": "Illinois Appellate Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "516 N.E.2d 991", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "163 Ill. App. 3d 289", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 3546720 ], "pin_cites": [ { "page": "291" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/163/0289-01" ] }, { "cite": "421 N.E.2d 193", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "85 Ill. 2d 117", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5469202 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/85/0117-01" ] }, { "cite": "512 N.E.2d 110", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "158 Ill. App. 3d 1025", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d", "case_ids": [ 3578163 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-app-3d/158/1025-01" ] }, { "cite": "461 N.E.2d 954", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "101 Ill. 2d 236", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 3161050 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/101/0236-01" ] }, { "cite": "454 N.E.2d 655", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "N.E.2d", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "97 Ill. 2d 382", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill. 2d", "case_ids": [ 5516453 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill-2d/97/0382-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 600, "char_count": 10937, "ocr_confidence": 0.784, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.6299423712034758e-07, "percentile": 0.6887372584270357 }, "sha256": "76ead9a720a622acd1b0e71fb1b69eca1191ce50595b05257fac43a812b1e971", "simhash": "1:e5f5901381936407", "word_count": 1711 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:22:52.001106+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "HELEN BEELER, Appellant, v. THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. (Sherwin Williams, Appellee)." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "JUSTICE LEWIS\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nPetitioner, Helen Beeler, widow of Melvin Beeler, filed an application for adjustment of claim under the Workers\u2019 Occupational Diseases Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 48, par. 172.36 et seq.), naming as respondent therein Sherwin Williams Chemical Division, Mr. Beeler\u2019s former employer. An arbitrator denied petitioner\u2019s claim for compensation, finding that petitioner had failed to prove decedent\u2019s death arose out of and in the course of his employment with respondent or was causally related thereto. Petitioner obtained a reversal of the arbitrator\u2019s decision in proceedings before the Industrial Commission. The Commission found that decedent had been exposed to an occupational hazard in the course of his employment that was causally related to his death. Respondent sought review of the Commission\u2019s order in the circuit court of Montgomery County, and on May 2, 1988, the court set aside the Commission\u2019s award, holding that the Commission\u2019s decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Petitioner appeals raising a single issue, whether the decision of the Industrial Commission was against the manifest weight of the evidence.\nAt the hearing before the arbitrator the petitioner testified that she had met her husband, Melvin Beeler, in April of 1941. At that time he had just started to work for Eagle Pitcher Industries, the predecessor of Sherwin Williams. He was in good health and had no respiratory ailments. Mr. Beeler was a member of the armed services from July 1942 to December 1945. He returned from the service with no apparent health problems and resumed his employment at Eagle Pitcher\u2019s plant, where he was continually employed up to the date of his death on May 15,1981.\nOn days when he returned from work without having showered, he was completely covered with \u201cwhite oxide,\u201d a dust-like substance. He had dust on his face on days when he had not worn a respirator. In 1962 Mr. Beeler, a nonsmoker, developed a chronic cough and respiratory problems. His health steadily deteriorated. His condition seemed to be worse upon his return home from work; however, it would improve somewhat by morning. Mr. Beeler suffered an asthmatic attack on the morning of May 15, 1981, while preparing his lunch for work and died a short time later.\nLester Roemlin, formerly employed as a supervisor for Eagle Pitcher Industries and respondent, Sherwin Williams, testified concerning Mr. Beeler\u2019s working conditions. Roemlin stated that he had seen Beeler covered with zinc oxide dust. Beeler\u2019s job entailed sweeping dust off the floor of the plant and repairing bags containing the dust. Roemlin said there was not much dust in the plant, but respirators were provided to all employees. Beeler did not always wear a respirator. The company did not enforce rules requiring employees to wear respirators.\nThe transcript of Dr. Noah Dixon\u2019s deposition was introduced as evidence. Dixon testified that he had served in the Air Force for six years as a senior flight surgeon and as a consultant concerning pulmonary diseases prior to entering private practice in 1961. Dr. Dixon was board-certified in internal medicine, allergy and pulmonary diseases, and immunology. He served on the staff of Southern Illinois University Medical School and was a consultant to intensive care services at St. John\u2019s Hospital in Springfield, Illinois. Dixon\u2019s practice was limited primarily to allergy and pulmonary diseases. He was Melvin Beeler\u2019s treating physician.\nIn 1972 Beeler, suffering from severe asthmatic bronchitis, was examined by Dr. Dixon and was subsequently hospitalized. Beeler told Dr. Dixon that he had been engaged in dusty work most of his life and had experienced coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath since 1967. Dixon diagnosed Beeler\u2019s condition as \u201cinfectious bronchitis with asthmatic bronchitis and chronic obstructive lung disease and bronchitis medicamentosa.\u201d The condition was chronic and \u201cintrinsic in nature,\u201d that is, it was engendered by no specific identifiable external cause. Dr. Dixon was of the opinion that exposure to dusts would aggravate and compound the condition.\nA translation of a Russian study of the effects of zinc oxide dust in the workplace was introduced. The study noted the \u201chighly dispersible\u201d characteristics of the dust and concluded that zinc oxide dust has an adverse effect on the upper respiratory system.\nThe transcript of Dr. Howard Van Ordstrand\u2019s deposition was admitted into evidence. Dr. Van Ordstrand\u2019s curriculum vitae was introduced to demonstrate his experience and qualifications. Dr. Van Ordstrand was undoubtedly highly qualified in thoracic, respiratory, and pulmonary medicine. His achievements, memberships, and associations are too numerous to recount here. Dr. Van Ordstrand had studied Beeler\u2019s medical records and had examined his X rays. He had read X rays for \u201cseveral large companies.\u201d Dr. Van Ordstrand expressed the opinion that Beeler suffered from episodic attacks of intrinsic bronchial asthma and that he died because of his asthmatic condition. Dr. Van Ordstrand explained that intrinsic asthma is caused by internal factors such as stress or infections; extrinsic asthma is caused by external factors such as pollen. Intrinsic asthma is characterized by periods of latency between attacks, that is, it is episodic; extrinsic asthma caused by an agent in the workplace occurs as long as the agent is present. According to Dr. Van Ordstrand, if Beeler had reported that irritants at his workplace caused his asthma and that his condition improved when he was away from the workplace, then he might have had extrinsic asthma. However, Dr. Van Ordstrand was of the opinion that, regardless of the quantity of zinc oxide dust to which Beeler had been exposed, the dust could not have been a cause of his asthma or an aggravating factor. When questioned by petitioner\u2019s counsel, Dr. Van Ordstrand acknowledged that some authorities believe all asthma would prove to be extrinsic if only the appropriate antigens were identified. Generally speaking, extrinsic asthma is caused by known agents, whereas intrinsic asthma is caused by unknown agents.\nRespondent introduced into evidence Beeler\u2019s medical records, which indicated excessive exposure to dust and allergies to pollen and dust; three medical articles addressing the effects of exposure to zinc oxide dust; and a letter from Dr. Van Ordstrand.\nAn arbitrator denied petitioner benefits. On the same evidence the Industrial Commission reversed, finding that Beeler had been exposed to an occupational hazard that aggravated his preexisting condition of bronchial asthma and was causally related to his death. The circuit court reversed the Industrial Commission, stating, \u201cThe Court is not qualified to say which expert has more expertise overall, but it is apparent that Dr. Van Ordstrand has superior knowledge of the effects of zinc oxide in the workplace and of occupational asthma in general.\u201d The court also noted that \u201cthe greater weight of scientific literature supports the proposition that zinc oxide dust or powder is not harmful to the employee.\u201d.\nIt is the function of the Industrial Commission to resolve disputed questions of fact, including those of causal connection, to draw permissible inferences, and to decide which of conflicting medical views is to be accepted. (Material Service Corp. v. Industrial Comm\u2019n (1983), 97 Ill. 2d 382, 454 N.E.2d 655.) Credibility of witnesses and causal connection are questions for the determination of the Industrial Commission, and its decision will not be set aside unless it is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. (Certi-Serve, Inc. v. Industrial Comm\u2019n (1984), 101 Ill. 2d 236, 461 N.E.2d 954.) A reviewing court should neither overturn the Commission\u2019s findings simply because a different inference could be drawn nor otherwise substitute its judgment for that of the Commission. (Hoegger v. Industrial Comm\u2019n (1987), 158 Ill. App. 3d 1025, 512 N.E.2d 110.) In this case, we think that the circuit court substituted its judgment for that of the Commission.\nBoth Drs. Dixon and Van Ordstrand diagnosed Beeler\u2019s condition as intrinsic asthma. Even assuming that Beeler\u2019s condition was not caused by dust in his workplace, Dr. Dixon testified that exposure to dust would aggravate and compound Beeler\u2019s preexisting illness. A compensable injury will be found upon a showing that a preexisting illness was aggravated or accelerated by conditions in the workplace. (Williams v. Industrial Comm\u2019n (1981), 85 Ill. 2d 117, 421 N.E.2d 193.) Dr. Van Ordstrand testified, however, that no amount of zinc oxide dust or powder could have caused Beeler\u2019s asthma or aggravated his condition.\nContrary to Dr. Van Ordstrand\u2019s suppositions, Beeler\u2019s medical records indicate that Beeler had complained of dust in the workplace. Petitioner testified that her husband had been covered with dust on those occasions when he came home from work without having showered. She also testified that his condition was worse upon his return from work and improved after a night away from work. From petitioner\u2019s testimony it could be inferred that Beeler had been regularly exposed to zinc oxide dust that apparently aggravated his asthma. From Dr. Dixon\u2019s testimony, it is evident that exposure to dust would have aggravated Beeler\u2019s condition. Thus, a causal connection was established. The Commission could have inferred that the adverse effect of frequent exposure to high concentrations of dust in the air would be more pronounced in a person, such as Beeler, with a preexisting condition. The Industrial Commission could reasonably have relied upon Dr. Dixon\u2019s opinion and rejected that of Dr. Van Ordstrand.\nAs stated in Board of Trustees of Southern Illinois University v. Knight (1987), 163 Ill. App. 3d 289, 291, 516 N.E.2d 991, 993:\n\u201cA decision is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence only when, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the agency, the court determines that no rational trier of fact could have agreed with the agency\u2019s decision.\u201d\nIt appears the circuit court substituted its judgment for that of the Industrial Commission. The record shows that the decision of the Commission is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Therefore, the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the decision of the Industrial Commission is reinstated.\nCircuit court reversed; order of the Illinois Industrial Commission reinstated.\nBARRY, P.J., and McNAMARA, WOODWARD, and McCullough, jj., concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "JUSTICE LEWIS" } ], "attorneys": [ "John J. Larsen, Jr., of St. Louis, Missouri, for appellant.", "Robert L. Mueller, of Livingstone, Mueller, O\u2019Brien & Davlin, of Springfield, for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "HELEN BEELER, Appellant, v. THE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al. (Sherwin Williams, Appellee).\nFifth District\nNo. 5\u201488\u20140307WC\nOpinion filed January 18, 1989.\nRehearing denied March 10, 1989.\nJohn J. Larsen, Jr., of St. Louis, Missouri, for appellant.\nRobert L. Mueller, of Livingstone, Mueller, O\u2019Brien & Davlin, of Springfield, for appellee." }, "file_name": "0463-01", "first_page_order": 485, "last_page_order": 489 }