Attorneys’ pleas for fees pays offBy Cameron B. ClarkJanuary 2006In Alvarado v. Industrial Commission, the Illinois Supreme Court, in a decision delivered by Justice Thomas, addressed the issue of whether the Commission may award attorney fees to a claimant’s former attorney several months after the Commission approved a settlement between the claimant and his employer.
Benefits slip away from claimantBy Carol A. CesarettiSeptember 2006The First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that claimant’s slip and fall in the employee bathroom did not arise out of her employment. First Cash Financial Services v. Industrial Comm’n, 2006 WL 2072314 (1st Dist.).
Carpenter bypasses employer’s attempts to detour benefitsBy Arnold G. RubinJanuary 2006In order to recover for benefits under the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act, it is well accepted that a claimant’s work-related injury must “arise out of and in the course of the employment.”
Co-Editor’s notesBy Richard D. HanniganSeptember 2006Have you started to accumulate your hours of education for the mandatory Minimum Continuing Legal Education?
Co-editor’s notesBy Richard D. HanniganMarch 2006Congratulations go out to our Chair, John Adams, Vice Chair, Deborah Benzing and Secretary, John Sheperd, as well as all of the lecturers who presented the ISBA with two educational seminars in February of this year.
Co-Editor’s notesBy Richard D. HanniganJanuary 2006MCLE (minimum, not mandatory, continuing legal education) is here. The officers of the Workers’ Compensation Section, John Adams, Deborah Benzing, John Shepard, the co-editors and all of the counsel section members are working to deliver quality material to assist you in meeting your bi-yearly requirements.
Commission lacks jurisdiction to review Section 8(d)(1) awardBy Carol A. CesarettiMarch 2006In its recent decision in Cassens Transport Co. v. Industrial Commission, 2006 WL 360186 (Ill., 2006), the Illinois Supreme Court held that the Commission lacked jurisdiction to reopen or modify a 10-year-old wage differential award under the Workers’ Compensation Act.
The contract for hire: The exclusive test for determining jurisdictionBy Cameron B. ClarkMarch 2006This article will focus on the Supreme Court’s analysis of the issue presented before it. For a full discussion of the facts surrounding the Mahoney decision, please refer to the March 2005 issue of the ISBA Worker’s Compensation Law Newsletter, Vol. 42, No. 3.
Double denial results in single victory for injured claimantBy Cameron B. ClarkMarch 2006In Dunlap v. Nestle USA, Inc., 2005 U.S.App. LEXIS 27070 (7th Circuit 2005), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in a decision issued by Judge Wood, addressed the issue of whether the exclusivity provisions of the Act precluded the injured worker from pursuing a tort action against his employer.
Editor’s noteBy Richard D. HanniganDecember 2006Although the ISBA marks time from the third week in June to the third week in June, I am a traditionalist and mark time from January to December.
Editor’s noteBy Richard D. HanniganJune 2006John Adams’ tenure as Chairperson has come to an end. He has had a great year and has set the bar high for the incoming Chairperson, Deborah Benzing, and all others who follow.
Employer avoids “commutation” orderBy Arnold G. RubinJanuary 2006Section 24 of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act provides authority for the Commission to order and direct an employer to deposit the commuted value of the total unpaid compensation with the State Treasurer or with any savings and loan association or State or national bank or trust company doing business in the State.
Estate wins debate over abatement of claimBy Cameron B. ClarkJanuary 2006In Nationwide Bank, the appellate court was faced with the question of whether or not a claim abated upon the death of the injured worker’s spouse.
First District Appellate Court holds that specific reservation of workers’ compensation lien in settlement contract not required for lien to be enforceableBy Michael A. MooreDecember 2006An August 30, 2006, decision from the Illinois Appellate Court’s First District in the case of James Gallagher v. Lenart, No. 1-06-0065WC (2006 WL 2506210), held that an employer does not have to specifically reserve its workers’ compensation lien right in a workers’ compensation settlement agreement in order for that lien to be enforceable, and specifically rejected the reasoning of the Fourth District Appellate Court’s decision in Borrowman v. Prastein, 356 Ill.App.3d 546, 826 N.E.2d 600 (4th Dist. 2005).
GHERE no more? Certified Testing v. Ind. Comm’n, _ _ N.E.2d _ _ , 2006 WL 3060086 (Ill.App. 4th Dist.)By Brad E. BleakneyDecember 2006If there is no discovery in Workers’ Compensation (except the subpoena), do you wonder why then the defense attorney always makes a demand for medical records supporting the claim when forwarding their appearance? The answer is the Section 12 objection, recently known as the Ghere objection.
Hospital Director of Nurses suffers stroke while giving speech at physician’s retirement dinner - held compensableBy James W. StevensonJune 2006In Pinckneyville Community Hospital v. Industrial Commission, (Mary Downen) 2006 WL 922220 5th District Appellate Court March 30, 2006, Mary Downen, a Director of Nurses for the Pinckneyville Community Hospital, suffered an intracerebral hemorrhage and stroke while giving a speech at a dinner to honor a retiring physician.
Illinois Appellate Court holds injury at company picnic not compensable when there was no penalty for non-attendanceBy Michael A. MooreSeptember 2006A July 12, 2006, decision from the Illinois Appellate Court’s First District in the case of William Gooden v. The Industrial Commission, 2006 WL 1913879, denied compensation to an employee injured while participating in recreational activities at a company picnic pursuant to Section 11 of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act.
Illinois jurisdictionBy William R. GallagherDecember 2006The Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act contains a provision which defines the term “employee.” Included as part of this definition of “employee,” the Act provides a basis for Illinois jurisdiction.
Medical community remains skeptical of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS)By Edyta SalataMarch 2006In Bernardoni v. Indus. Comm’n., 298 Ill. Dec. 530, 840 N.E. 2d 300 (2005), the appellate court held that petitioner failed to show that multiple chemical sensitivity (hereinafter “MCS”) was a generally accepted syndrome in the medical community.
No causal connection for claimant, despite cracked helmetBy Michelle L. LaFayetteSeptember 2006In this Rule 23 decision, the Illinois Appellate Court held that a herniated disc was not causally connected to claimant’s work accident based upon a normal CT scan, unrestricted cervical range of motion, considerable gaps in medical care and treatment, and extended performance of full-duty activities.
Payment of award of medical bills directly to medical provider/Section 19(g) and hourly attorney fee set at $250By James W. StevensonJune 2006In Aurora East School District v. Don Dover, 363 Ill.App.3d 1048, 847 N.E.2d 623, 301 Ill.Dec. 298 2nd District March 21, 2006, Don Dover, employed by the Aurora East School District, received an award which included TTD benefits of $29,908.13, representing 59-6/7 weeks, and $85,015.04 in medical expenses.
Payments related to replacing and servicing claimant’s prosthesis included in employer’s subrogation claimBy Janet D. PallardyDecember 2006The Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, rendered a decision on October 4, 2006, allowing Respondent a lien credit against a third-party judgment for payments made under the Workers’ Compensation Act pertaining to replacing and servicing claimant’s prosthesis. Crispell v. Industrial Commission, __ N.E.2d __, 2006 WL2879068 (Ill.App. 5 Dist).
Pekin Insurance v. Anthony HieraBy Carol A. CesarettiMarch 2006In this Fourth District case, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court granting Hiera’s motion for an immediate UM arbitration and denying Pekin’s motion to stay said proceedings.