Danziger

The petitioner was injured in the course of employment. Upon application to the Industrial Accident Commission for adjustment of his claim, stating that he had asked for an operation and for a truss to relieve a hernia, it was found and awarded that he be compensated by a surgical operation with necessary incidental medical and hospital treatment and a weekly allowance for temporary disability. The applicant having refused surgical treatment when tendered, a petition to terminate liability was filed, which, following a hearing and repeated refusals to submit thereto, was granted. Upon a petition for a writ of certiorari it is asserted that the Commission acted in excess of its authority in terminating liability, that such order was unreasonable, and that the evidence does not justify findings of fact requiring or warranting the same.

Section 11 (e) of the Workmen’s Compensation, Insurance and Safety Act provides as follows:

The Commission is vested with full power and authority to regulate and prescribe the nature and extent of proofs and evidence. (Sec. 57 [6].) It may find therefrom upon ultimate facts, and its findings and conclusions in that respect shall be conclusive and…