Articles From Stephen G. Baime

Memories of World Travels By Stephen G. Baime Senior Lawyers, November 2020 One attorney's favorite travel memories.
The difference between causal connection and maximum medical improvement By Stephen G. Baime Workers’ Compensation Law, May 2018 The appellate court's decision in Tequila Smith vs. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n explains how to apply the rule of law to the facts when considering causal connection and maximum medical improvement.
Two recent cases denying motions to reinstate By Stephen G. Baime Workers’ Compensation Law, March 2017 The Appellate Court recently handed down two Rule 23 decisions unanimously affirming the denial of petitions to reinstate. At first blush, the decisions seem harsh, but a careful reading of each decision supports the results.
Analysis of Village of Deerfield v. Illinois Workers Compensation Commission, 2014 Ill. App (2d) 131202WC (2014) By Stephen G. Baime Workers’ Compensation Law, April 2015 If one sustains two injuries on two separate dates to two different parts of the body and consolidates the claims for trial, he can collect a percentage of a person on one and a wage differential on the second one even if the part of the body in the second case could have resulted in a person as a whole award.
Intervening accident does not preclude permanency award on first accident By Stephen G. Baime Workers’ Compensation Law, August 2013 The case of National Freight Industries v. IWCC et al 2013 IL app. (5th) 120043WC stands for the proposition that an intervening accident does not preclude a permanency award for injuries sustained in the first accident. This is a most interesting case, and complicated, but the ruling of the Illinois Appellate Court is just.
Defense surveillance video of plaintiff ruled inadmissible By Stephen G. Baime Tort Law, March 2005 A recent decision of the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, is of great importance to lawyers representing either party in personal injury and workers' compensation litigation.
Acceptance of unsolicited workers’ compensation benefits does not bar common law action By Stephen G. Baime Tort Law, May 2004 The recent case of Wren v. Reddick Community Fire Protection District, 337 Ill. App. 3d 262, 785 N.E.2d 1052, 271 Ill. Dec. 858 (2003), held that the injured plaintiffs could proceed with a third-party claim in court even though they accepted workers' compensation benefits and filed a workers' compensation claim against the defendant.

Spot an error in your article? Contact Sara Anderson at For information on obtaining a copy of an article,visit the ISBA Newsletters page.

Select a Different Author