Borrowing Employer Ordered to Reimburse Loaning Employer for Workers’ Compensation Benefits Paid

Surestaff v. Open Kitchens No. 1-06-3225 In the summer of 2003, Surestaff, a day labor service, and Open Kitchens, a food service company, which provided meals to various identities in the Chicago Public School and the Chicago Housing Authority, entered into an agreement where Open Kitchens would provide additional workers for the summer lunch program. 

Limitation of Two-Physician Rule Not Applicable When Second Physician Had Not Requested Payment

Comfort Masters v. Workers’ Compensation No. 1-07-1951WC As we all know, Section 8(a) of the Act describes the so-called two-physician rule.  Subsections 8(a)(2) and (a)(3) provides as follows: [T]he employer’s liability to pay for *** medical services selected by the employee shall be limited to: *** (2) all medical, surgical and hospital services provided by

When a “Sale” of a Lien Amounts to a Recovery of the Compensation Lien

Evans v. Doherty Construction, et al No. 1-07-1455 On April 25, 2008, the First District Appellate Court, Fifth Division, decided the case ofMichael Evans vs. Doherty Construction, et al. which has ramifications for any employer who attempts to assign a workers’ compensation lien to avoid potential third party liability and still recover a portion of

Flight Attendant’s Reimbursement of Expenses Is Not Included in the Average Weekly Wage

United Airlines, Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Commission No. 1-07-1316WC Mary Ritter in 1998, employed by United Airlines as a flight attendant, suffered two work-related accidents.  The first occurred on August 27, 1998 when she sustained an injury to her back and the second on September 9, 2000 when she re-injured the back and never returned

Temporary Total Disability Payments Made During FMLA Leave Period Did Not Prevent Termination of Employment at Conclusion of Twelve-Week FMLA Period

Dotson v. BRP US Incorporated, et al No. 07-1375 Brian Dotson, employee of BRP US, Inc. was terminated from his employment after filing a workers’ compensation claim.  In support of the termination, the employer relied on the fact that Dotson’s absence from work exceeded the amount of time allotted by the Family and Medical Leave

Petitioner Denied Specific Loss Award in Addition to Two-Member Permanent Total Disability Benefits

Beelman Trucking v. Workers’ Compensation Commission On April 19, 1995, Jack Carson, a truck driver employed by Beelman Trucking, was involved in a serious motor vehicle accident resulting in severe and permanent injuries.  He suffered a burst fracture at C5-6 resulting in a complete loss of use of both legs and the near complete paralysis

Loaning and Borrowing Employers Both Immunized From Common Law Liability

Roberto Chavez v. Transload Services, et al No. 1-07-0125 In our August 2007 Newsletter, we discussed the case of Marshall Behrens, who was sent by a labor service (People Link) to California Cartage Company.  At the same time, Cynthia Smith had been sent by another labor service (Staffers Resources) to California Cartage Company, as well. 

Another Hopeless Attempt by a Loaned Employee to Collect on a Personal Injury Claim Against the Borr

Chavez vs. Transload Services No. 1-07-0125 In our recent Newsletter of September 2007, we described the Behrens v. California Cartage case where loaning and borrowing employers were both immunized from common law liability because of the exclusivity provisions of Section 5.  You may recall that in that case, the plaintiff and defendant were referred by

Dismissal of Suit by Reason of the Exclusivity Provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act was Held to be Premature

William J. Foster v. John A. Johnson No. 1-06-0822 William Foster and John Johnson were both employees of the CTA in a Chicago facility.  On October 17, 2002, Johnson allegedly committed a battery against Foster and filed a civil action.  Initially, Foster had filed a workers’ compensation action stating that the CTA had paid $657

Contractors Hiring Individuals as Subcontractors May Find that New Illinois Statute Would Classify the Individuals as Employees

The Employee Classification Act became effective January 1, 2008.  The stated purpose of the Act “is intended to address the practice of mis-classifying employees as independent contractors.”  As a result, a contractor who engages an individual or partnership under a subcontract may find that said contractor may be deemed to be an employee of the