Workers’ Compensation Law

Claimant filed an application for adjustment of claim under the Workers’ Compensation Act seeking survivor benefits on behalf of a decedent who suffered a heart attack and died while shoveling snow for his employer. The arbitrator denied benefits by finding that claimant failed to prove the decedent sustained an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment and that the claimant was not entitled to benefits because he was an adult child of the decedent. The Workers’ Compensation Commission affirmed and adopted the arbitrator’s decision and claimant appealed. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that the commission’s decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence based on testimony that shoveling snow was a contributing factor in the decedent’s condition and that under the broad eligibility criteria for surviving children benefits claimant was entitled to benefits. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, MULLEN, and CAVANAGH, concurring)

Plaintiff employer appealed from an order of the circuit court confirming the decision of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission awarding the claimant benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act, arguing that the commission erred in awarding PPD benefits for non-scheduled body parts in addition to an award of statutory PTD benefits. The claimant argued that denying compensation beyond the two members compensable under section 8(e)(18) of the Act would leave him uncompensated for the additional non-scheduled losses that could impact his earning capacity. The appellate court agreed with claimant and affirmed. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, MULLEN, and CAVANAGH, concurring)

Claimant appealed from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission awarding him permanent partial disability and denying his claims for compensation for additional injuries and medical expenses. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the commission’s resolution of the issues was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where there was conflicting evidence on the issue of causation noting that resolution of conflicts in the evidence is a matter primarily left for the commission. (HOLDRIDGE and HOFFMAN, concurring)

The Town of Cicero appealed from an order of the circuit court affirming a decision of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that the town’s employee was a traveling employee and that injuries he sustained after he slipped and fell arose out of the course of his employment. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the circuit court’s findings were not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the employee had reported to work and was on his way to conduct an inspection that was part of his job duties. (HOLDRIDGE, MULLEN, CAVANAGH, and BARBERIS, concurring)

Plaintiff and two defendants appealed form an order of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of a third defendant based on the exclusive remedy provision contained in the Workers’ Compensation Act. The appellate court affirmed, finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact on the issue of whether the defendant had the right to control and direct the manner in which the plaintiff performed his work and whether there was an implied contract of hire between plaintiff and the defendant. (ROCHFORD and MARTIN, concurring)

Plaintiff filed a complaint seeking damages for the death of an individual who was murdered by a co-worker. The trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss finding that the lawsuit was barred by the Workers’ Compensation Act. Plaintiff appealed, arguing that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the exclusive remedy provision of the Act applied to her claim. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the plaintiff had not provided evidence that the dispute leading to the decedent’s death was unrelated to the employer’s work and to find so would require the factfinder to engage in speculation regarding the nature of the dispute. (ELLIS and COBBS, concurring)

Claimant appealed from a circuit court order reversing a decision of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission awarding her benefits for injuries to her wrist sustained while employed as a crossing guard. The Commission had concluded that while claimant was traveling to work at the time of the injury, the injury arose out of and was in the court of her employment because she was on the village’s premises at the time of the injury. Claimant appealed the circuit court’s order and the appellate court found in her favor, reversing the circuit court order and reinstating the decision of the commission. (HOLDRIDGE, JUDSON, CAVANAGH, and BARBERIS, concurring)

Respondent appealed from the decision of the Will county circuit court confirming the decision of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission denying its requests for credits against amounts awarded to the claimant under the Workers’ Compensation Act. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the sum respondent sought to recoup was paid to the claimant pursuant to the make-whole [provision in the collective bargaining agreement that the parties were operating under and, as a result, there was no overpayment nor was there an early payment made toward satisfying a future obligation. (HOLDRIDGE, HOFFMAN, CAVANAGH, and BARBERIS, concurring)