Illinois Workers Compensation Lawyer Blog

The Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission awarded benefits for a worker's permanent disabiliy sustained as a result of being attacked in a robbery while working as an armored car messenger. His condition warranted a finding of 35 percent loss of use of the person as a whole under Secton 8(d)2 and 20 percent loss of use of the left arm under Sectoin 8(e)10.

Wright v. United Armored Services Corp., 16 ILWCLB 241 (Ill.Ind.Comm.2008).

Wright was working as an armored car mesenger when he was attacked and shot several times by a robber. He was wounded in the neck, jaw and left scapula. He was diagnosed with avascular injury of the right carotid jugular vein, a left scapula fracture, and fracture of the nasal bone. He suffered hemorrhages to his neck and a collapsed right lung and underwent a carotid artery resection. After spending three days in intensive care and an additonal two days in the hospital, he missed six weeks of work. He returned to light-duty office work for four months before returning full duty to a truck. Upon returning to the truck, he reported being nervous and cautious about his duties. The arbtirator awarded permanent disability under Section 8(d)2 for 35 percent loss of use of a person as a whole and under Section 8(e)10 for 20 percent loss of use of the left arm.

In determining the nature and extent of the injury, the arbitrator noted that Wright testified to pain, restricted mobility, numbness and spasms in his neck. He was also suffering from hypertension and left shoulder problems. In additon, Wright reproted difficulty lifting weights in excess of 30 to 40 pounds and less stamina. By the end of his workday, Wright was extremely tired. Relying on the evidence, the arbitrator issued its permanent disaibility awards.

Upon review, the Commission affirmed and adopted the decision of the arbitrator.

Posted by Donald W. Fohrman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

The Illinois Workers' Compensation Commisison held that an employee who alleged she slipped and fell at work failed to prove she sustained an accident arising out of and in the course of her employment

Martniez v. Universal Laminating, 16 ILWCLB 237 (Ill.Ind.Comm. 2008)

Martinez testified that she slipped and fell on scrap material that was coming out of a machine and onto the floor at work. She stated there there was a large pile of debris. However, evidence indicated that the machine was equipped with a bin to collect scrap material. Two witnesses to the accident testified that there was no such material present that Martinez just seemed to trip over her own feet. The arbitrator found Martinez failed to prove an accident occurrred that arose out of and in the course of her employemnt. Upon review the Commission affirmed and adopted the decision of the arbitrator.

Continue reading " Illinois Workers' Comepnsation claim topped for failure to show increased risk " »

Posted by Donald W. Fohrman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In:

Bookmark:

The Illinois Appellate court, 2nd District affirmed the Illinois Worker’s Compensation Commission holding that the arbitrator erred in ordering the recall of his first decision and issuing a second decision. Therefore, the arbitrator’s second decision was null and void, and the first decision was the final decision of the Commission.

Smalley Steel Ring Co., v. (Diaz), Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission, 16 ILWCLB 232 (Ill.App.Ct., 2nd 2008).

In his first decision filed on April 7, 2005, the arbitrator found the claimant’s case compensable. On May 10, 2005, the employer filed an emergency motion to recall the arbitrator’s decision and reopen proofs. The employer alleged it discovered new evidence from a coworker regarding the claimant’s true identity and his prior injuries. The arbitrator granted the motion. On Nov. 15, 2005, the arbitrator issued a second decision finding the claimant acted fraudulently and lacked credibility. The arbitrator denied benefits. On appeal, the claimant argued that the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to recall his first decision, reopen proofs, and reissue a decision. The Commission agreed, holding that the first decision issued by the arbitrator was the final decisions of the Commission, that the arbitrator erred in reopening proofs and issuing a second decision, and that the second decision issued was null and void. The Circuit Court confirmed the Commission’s decision. The Illinois Appellate Court held that the Commission properly found that the arbitrator did not have the statutory authority to recall his first decision, reopen proofs and issue a second decision.

Section 19(f), of the WCA is the only provision under which an arbitrator has jurisdiction to recall decisions. Pursuant to Section 19(f), the Commission may reopen or modify a final award for clerical errors or errors in computation. No such errors were present in this case. The court explained that no other provision of the WCA provided for the filing of the employer’s motion or the arbitrator’s actions in granting that motion, reopening proofs, and issuing a second decision. Therefore, the employer’s motion and the arbitrator’s second decision were nullities.

Also, the court explained that fraud is not a basis for extending the statutory authority of the arbitrator or the Commission. Sections 19(b) and 19(f) provide for the finality of the arbitrator’s and the Commission’s decision, respectively, when further review has not been sought by either party within a particular time frame. Each section also provides for conclusive decisions “in the absence of fraud.” In Michelson v. Industrial Commission, the Illinois Supreme Court declined to find that the legislature intended the “in the absence of fraud” language to give the Commission the authority to set aside its orders on the ground of fraud.

As the arbitrator did not have statutory authority to act, he was without jurisdiction to recall his decision, reopen proofs and issue a second decision.

Posted by Donald W. Fohrman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Workers Compensation

Bookmark:

The Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission awarded permanent total disability benefits to a senior sales representative for an insurance company who injured his back. The worker had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that he had a complete disability rendering him wholly and permanently incapable of work.

Rujewski v. Humana Inc., 17 ILWCLB 33 (Ill.W.C.Comm 2008).

Rujewski, a highly educated and experienced businessman, injured his back while working as a senior sales representative for the defendant. His job duties were to sell professional medical services to large groups by soliciting actual client groups and brokers. He would prepare quotes, make presentations and sales calls and conduct open enrollments. Much of the work was done out of the office and involved driving 300 to 350 miles per week. The year before his accident, he earned over $250,000. He was 60 years old at the time of the trial and had not worked since undergoing low back surgery in April 2004. The treating surgeon opined that Rujewski was permanently and totally disabled, while the defendant's examining doctor believed that Rujewski could do some type of work with physical restrictinos and accommodations. The defendant's vocational expert opined that there was no indication that Rujewski could not peform in his usual and customary line of employment based upon his education, work experience and physical capacity.

Continue reading " Illinois businessman awarded PTD due to inability to concentrate because of pain and narcotic medication " »

Posted by Donald W. Fohrman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Workers Compensation

Bookmark: