Workers’ Compensation Law

Employee, a child support coordinator in county courthouse, sustained left wrist fracture when her heel caught in a defect in sidewalk and she fell filed claim for workers compensation benefits for injury to wrist. Fall occurred when employee was walking from work-related meeting at administration building to her office, to enter through front door of courthouse, which was only means of access at time of accident. Employee took this route daily and even though general public used it as well and faced same hazard of defective sidewalk, special hazard became part of her employment, and given her work requirement that she attend meetings at administration building, her risk of injury on sidewalk was greater than for general public. Thus, injury arose out of her employment. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, and HUDSON, concurring; HARRIS, specially concurring.)

(Modified upon denial of rehearing 4/30/14.) Workers' compensation settlement agreement is ambiguous as to total amount employer owed to employee. Court remanded case for evidentiary hearing as settlement agreement is ambiguous, contains conflicting clauses, and is open to more than one interpretation. Employer interprets agreement as requiring a lump-sum payment of $400,000; and employee interprets agreement as requiring a lump-sum payment of $400,000, in addition to payment of a Medicare Set-Aside, in annuity form.(PUCINSKI and MASON, concurring.)

City employee, a candidate in training at Chicago Fire and Paramedic Academy, filed workers compensation claim for kidney failure and other injuries from intense workouts and subsequent dehydration at Academy. Plaintiff was a recruit in training, not a sworn member of fire department at time of injury. Board's decision that claimant was fully recovered and fully able to work as paramedic by 8/3/09 collaterally estops claimant from relitigating issues of whether he was disabled after 8/3/09, and whether his work-related injuries rendered him unable to work as a paramedic therafter, (HOFFMAN, HUDSON, HARRIS, and STEWART, concurring.)

Village employee fell and was injured when walking down stairs at work, from meeting to locker room. Employees's use of stairs arose out of and in course of his employment, as he was continually forced to use stairway, at least 6 times per day, both for his personal comfort and to complete his work-related activities. Frequency with which employee was required to traverse stairs was increased risk compared to general public. (HOLDRIDGE, HUDSON, HARRIS, and STEWART, concurring.)

Temporary worker who was not a permanent employee, and not working for company on a long-term exclusive basis, did not qualify, under the "traveling employee exception", for workers compensation benefits. Worker made the personal decision that benefits of pay outweighed personal cost of traveling, and traveled only from the premises to his residing location.(FREEMAN, THOMAS, KARMEIER, BURKE, and THEIS, concurring; KILBRIDE, dissenting.)

There is sufficient evidence supporting Workers' Compensation Commission's finding that claimant's low back condition after April 2004 was not causally related to September 2004 workplace accident. Commission awarded claimant permanent disability of 10% loss of persona as a whole, which was not against manifest weight of evidence. Claimant's income from her side business should not be included in calculation of average weekly wage as it does not represent "wages" earned while working for employer. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, HUDSON, and STEWART, concurring.)