Workers’ Compensation Law

Claimant worked in grain elevators, including cleaning grain elevators and bins, and he was exposed to significant airborne dust particles including dried bird droppings. Doctors diagnosed him with lung condition caused by fungus usually associated with bird droppings. Commission's finding that Claimant did not give sufficient notice under Section 6(c) of Workers' Compensation Act is contrary to manifest weight of evidence. Although Claimant and his doctor initially thought he had cancer, employer knew of his respiratory conditions and work exposure, and initial inaccuracy in diagnosis did not prejudice employer. Failure to discovery causal connection until after employment relationship ended does not justify denial of benefits for injuries suffered during employment. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, HUDSON, and HARRIS, concurring.)

Claimant, who had worked for 22 years as coal miner, filed claim for coal workers' pneumoconiosis. Medical evidence at hearing indicated that Claimant was diagnosed with COPD caused in part by exposure to coal dust, but was not diagnosed with coal workers' pneumoconiosis. Workers Compensation Commission properly found claim time-barred because it was not filed within 3-year statute of limitations for claims alleging occupational diseases other than coal workers' pneumoconiosis, per Section 6(c) of Workers' Occupational Diseases Act. Five-year statute of limitations applies exclusively to coal workers with that diagnosis, rather than COPD, and thus does not apply to Claimant. No equal protection violation as statutory interpretation does not treat similarly situated individuals differently; the two diseases are different conditions diagnosed through different procedures. (HOFFMAN, HUDSON, HARRIS, and STEWART, concurring.)

(Modified upon denial of rehearing 5/13/14.) In workers compensation case, opinions of claimant's treating physician and employer's Section 12 examiner were divergent. Commission resolved conflict in testimony of physicians, and Section 12 examiner's heightened expertise was not so compelling that it rendered opposite conclusion clearly apparent. Employer did not demonstrate prejudice by arbitrator's denial of his motion to take evidence deposition of Section 12 expert, and order that admitting expert's report into evidence was sufficient. Case remanded for Commission to evaluate opinions of physical therapists as to reasonableness and necessity of home modifications. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, HARRIS, and STEWART, concurring.)

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.)