Credibility “defies logic”By Michelle L. LaFayetteWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2005In Chicago Messenger Service v. Industrial Commission, 826 N.E.2d 1037; 292 Ill.Dec. 601 (2005), the Appellate Court, First District, reversed the Commission's finding the claimant provided an injury from an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.
The Illinois Supreme Court plows through the snowy issue of concurrent employmentBy James TyrrellWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2005In a decision noteworthy for both average weekly wage determinations and wage differential awards, the Illinois Supreme Court in Flynn v Industrial Commission, 211 Ill.2d 546, 286 Ill. Dec.62, 813 N.E.2d 119, (June 17, 2004) held that a claimant who sustained serious injury while working a part time job was entitled to a wage differential award based on both the part time job and his regular, though seasonal, work as a truck driver even though he had been temporarily laid off from the driving job at the time of the accident.
New carpeting trips up the defenseBy James M. ByrnesWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2005In Tinley Park Hotel & Convention Center d/b/a Holiday Inn v. Industrial Commission, 826 N.E.2d 1043; 292 Ill.Dec. 607 (2005), the Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the Commission's finding the claimant proved her injuries arose out of her employment.
No repetitive requirement for repetitive trauma accidentBy Melissa L. McEndreeWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2005The Second District Appellate Court addressed the definition of repetitive trauma, specifically whether the activity must be perform on a regular or consistent basis.
Nursing assistant aided by CommissionBy Cameron B. ClarkWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2005In Kishwaukee Community Hospital v. Industrial Commission, 2005 WL 603095 (Ill.App. 2nd Dist., 2005), the Illinois Appellate Court, in a decision delivered by Justice Goldenhersh, addressed the issues of notice, medical causal connection, the admissibility of claimant's treating physician's deposition testimony, and claimant's entitlement to temporary total disability benefits.
Twice Over Clean- A respondent’s perspectiveBy James M. ByrnesWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2005In 2003, the Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Sisbro, Inc. v. Industrial Commission, 207 Ill.2d 193 (2003) (Sisbro II), in which it rejected the argument that the "normal daily activity" exception bars recovery when the claimant's physical condition has so deteriorated that the condition of ill-being could have been produced by normal daily activity, despite a causal connection between the work and the condition.
A $1 contract cost insurance carrier $37,500By Cameron B. ClarkWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2005In Sheppard v. Rebidas, 820 N.E.2d 1089, 290 Ill.Dec. 22 (1st Dist. 2004), the Illinois Appellate Court in a decision issued by Justice Greiman, addressed the issue of Section 5(b) lien rights relative to three unconsolidated claims.
Beware of stipulationsBy Cameron B. ClarkWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2005In Walker v. Illinois Industrial Commission, 345 Ill.App.3d 1084, 804 N.E.2d 135 (4th Dist., 2004), the Illinois Appellate Court, in a decision delivered by Justice McCullough, addressed the issue as to whether or not the information contained on the Industrial Commission Request for Hearing form is binding upon the parties.
Can an 8(d)1 award be modified?By Arnold G. RubinEducation Law, March 2005In Cassens Transport Company v. Illinois Industrial Commission, 2005 WL 95714 (4th Dist., I.C. Div., 2005), the Illinois Appellate Court, in a decision delivered by Justice McCullough, with a concurring opinion by Justice Holdridge, addressed the vexing issue as to whether or not a final award under Section 8(d)1 may be modified in a subsequent proceeding at the Illinois Industrial Commission.
The contract for hire: Is it the exclusive test for determining jurisdiction?By Cameron B. ClarkWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2005The First District Appellate Court addressed the issue as to whether the site of the contract for hire is the exclusive test for determining the applicability of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act to persons whose employment is outside of the state of Illinois where the contract for hire is made within Illinois.
Pre-trial discovery: Is it available for workers’ compensation claims?By Arnold G. RubinWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2005The Second District Appellate Court addressed the issue as to whether a claimant in a workers' compensation claim could obtain a surveillance videotape from an employer prior to commencing the Industrial Commission proceeding through an equitable bill of discovery filed in the Circuit Court of DuPage County.
Three post-surgical auto accidents failed to break causal connection chainBy Arnold G. RubinWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2005In Vogel v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission, 2005 WL 42748, (Ill.App. 2nd Dist. 2005), the Illinois Appellate Court, in a decision issued by Justice Callum, addressed the issue of medical causal relationship in light of three automobile accidents subsequent to surgery.
Are you covered? An analysis of Lenny Szarek, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.By Peter J. StavropoulosWorkers’ Compensation Law, December 2004This recent First Division Appellate Decision, issued on September 27, 2004, deals with the issue of how territoriality provisions of a workers' compensation insurance policy can impact coverage of workers' compensation claims.
Certification of hospital recordsBy Carol A. CesarettiWorkers’ Compensation Law, December 2004National Wrecking v. Industrial Commission, establishes that certification of hospital records is the bare minimum procedural requirement for proper admission under Section 16 of the Act if the parties do not stipulate to the admission of such records.
“Increased risk” as analyzed by the 5th DistrictBy Carol A. CesarettiWorkers’ Compensation Law, December 2004In Nascote Industries v. Industrial Commission, 2004 Ill.App. LEXIS 1326 5-03-0706WC (5th Dist. 2004) the 5th District distinguished Caterpillar Tractor in its analysis of what constitutes "increased risk."
IntroductionWorkers’ Compensation Law, December 2004This issue has been prepared by our Co-Editor, Carol A. Cesaretti of Brady, Connolly and Masuda.
Retaliatory dischargeBy Carol A. CesarettiWorkers’ Compensation Law, December 2004In Kevin C. Carter v. Tennant Company, 383 F.3d 673 (7th Cir, 2004), the Seventh Circuit held that because Carter was dishonest in filling out the "Health History Questionnaire" portion of his application that inquired about his prior work-related injuries and medical care, Tennant had a valid, non-pretextual reason to discharge him.
A valued investigationBy Carol A. CesarettiWorkers’ Compensation Law, December 2004In Robert Ross v. Entenmann's Bakery and Industrial Commission of Illinois, 2004 Ill.App. LEXIS 1246, the First District affirmed the Commission's decision holding that the claimant failed to prove an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of his employment.
Industrial Commission newsWorkers’ Compensation Law, September 2004On January 1, 2005, the Industrial Commission will change its name to the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission.
Recent casesWorkers’ Compensation Law, September 2004Litchfield Healthcare Center v. The Industrial Commission, 349 Ill.App.3d 486, 812 N.E.2d 401, 285 Ill.Dec. 581, involved an employee who was a certified nursing assis Litchfieldtant.
The Industrial Commission must determine who the aggressor wasBy Michelle D. PorroWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2004Our Supreme Court definitively determined that when the underlying accident is a fight between employees, the Industrial Commission must determine which of the employees was the aggressor in Sandra Franklin v. the Industrial Commission, in an opinion filed May 20, 2004. Id., Docket No. 96857 (Il. S. Ct. 2004).
What constitutes a valid appointment as a commissioner?By Michelle D. PorroWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2004The appellate court tackled this question in Sleeter v. Industrial Commission. No. 4-02-1044 WC. The first issue brought by this claim is simply a manifest weight of the evidence argument regarding accident.
When is a circuit court order final and appealable?By Michelle D. PorroWorkers’ Compensation Law, June 2004Where the Arbitrator and Industrial Commission find that the Petitioner is entitled to TTD, medical and an award of PPD equal to 45 percent maw, and the circuit court reverses and remands for a finding consistent with its opinion that the Petitioner is permanently and totally disabled, the circuit court's order is interlocutory and an appeal can not be perfected to the appellate court until after the claim has been heard on remand by the Industrial Commission.
Acceptance of unsolicited workers’ compensation benefits does not bar common law actionBy Stephen G. BaimeTort Law, May 2004The 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.
Clerical error. When is the proper time to file a Review?By Richard D. HanniganWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2004The appellate court seems to deal with this issue once every four years. In Diane Schultz v Forest Preserve District of Cook County, 1-02-2860 WC filed by the First District Appellate Court, Industrial Commission Division revisited that issue.
Commission newsBy Richard D. HanniganWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2004Updates of interest to workers' comp law practitioners.
Edward Don Co. v. Industrial CommissionBy Deborah A. BenzingWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2004In the recent decision of Edward Don Company v. The Industrial Commission, 344 Ill. App.3d 643, 801 N.E.2d 18 (2003), the appellate court held that the petitioner's overtime earnings were properly excluded from the average weekly wage calculation.
Five things you should know about the Commission’s review levelBy Jackie KinnamanWorkers’ Compensation Law, March 2004There is really only one thing you need to know to be effective in representing your clients on Review before the Industrial Commission: the brief is crucial.
