News

Loaning and Borrowing Employers Both Immunized From a Common Law Liability Claim Because of Exclusivity Provisions of Section 5

Behrens v. California Cartage Company, Inc. and Staffing Resources, Inc. No. 1-06-2729 In Behrens v. California Cartage Company, Inc. and Staffing Resources, Inc., the court addressed the issue of the possible liability of loaning and borrowing employers and concluded there existed a complete absence of common law liability for all possible defendants. On November 17,

Loaning Employer Denied Reimbursement from Borrowing Employer Because of an “Agreement to the Contrary”

Loaning Employer Denied Reimbursement from Borrowing Employer Because of an “Agreement to the Contrary” Surestaff, Inc. v. Azteca Foods, Inc No. 01-06-1994 Customarily, the respective liabilities of loaning and borrowing employers are determined by agreement. Most loaning employers are day labor services. Even in the absence of an agreement, most borrowing employers tend to expect

Court Upholds Claim for Retaliatory Discharge

Siekierka v. United Steel Deck No. 3-06-0365 In the case of Siekierka v. United Steel Deck, the claimant contended that United Steel had wrongfully discharged him in retaliation for his assertion of his rights under the Workers’ Compensation Act.  United Steel contended that the discharge was based on a company policy and not because of

Recent Court Decision Denied a Number of Disputed Claims Concerning Additional Maintenance or Temporary Total Disability Benefits

Consolidated Freightways v. Workers’ Compensation Commission and Mota v. Griffin Wheel Co. No. 1-06-1919WC and 07 I.W.C.C. 0365 In Consolidated Freightways case, the Commission had awarded maintenance payments for 58-5/7 weeks of additional benefits and further ordered Consolidated to provide the claimant with meaningful vocational rehabilitation.  This finding was reversed by the appellate court which

Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Denied Because of Terms of Settlement Contract

Burgess v. Tashonda Brooks No. 5-06-0273 In our April, 2005 Newsletter and the January, 2007 Newsletter, we reported on the issues being created because of the terminology, or lack thereof, in the settlement contract.  In the Borrowman case decided by the Fourth District Appellate Court, the settlement contract constituted a full release of all causes

Injured Corporate Officer Denies Signing Rejection of Benefits Form – Case Referred Back to Trial Court to Determine Validity of Signature

Virginia Surety Company v. Bill’s Builders, et al No. 3-06-0606 In our July, 2003 Newsletter and supplemental September, 2003 Alert, we reported to you on the case of General Casualty Company v. Carroll Tiling Service where the Illinois Second District Appellate Court awarded compensation benefits to a corporate officer who had signed a Benefits Rejection

All Overtime Earnings Excluded from Average Weekly Wage as Overtime Was Not Mandatory

Airborne Express, Inc. v. Industrial Commission No. 1-06-1960WC A most significant case has just been decided by the Special Appellate Court and will frequently be cited as the Airborne Express case.  Ron Bronke, a delivery driver for Airborne Express, was involved in three accidents, two in 2000 and one in 2001.  The three cases were

Appellate Court Reverses Trial Court’s Dismissal of Complaint Based on Shooting of One Employee by Another

Martinez v. Gutmann Leather No. 1-06-2346 In the Maria Martinez case, the appellate court had occasion to consider a civil action by the estate of a deceased employee.  Miguel Pena, an employee of Gutmann Leather, was allegedly killed by a fellow employee, Ramon Hernandez on the employer’s premises when Hernandez was still “on the clock.” 

Claimant Cannot Obtain “Odd Lot” Permanent Total Disability Award Without Supporting Evidence from a Rehabilitation of Vocational Counselor

Westin Hotel v. Industrial Commission No. 1-06-1728WC On October 5, 1998, Theodoros Vakalidis, a hotel painter, was attempting to prevent a heavy cart from tipping over as it dropped six inches from the sidewalk.  Consequently, he experienced injuries to his back and left knee resulting in treatment by eight orthopedic surgeons over the next four

In a Wage Differential Claim, the Court Found that Wages of Claimant’s Replacement Were Too Speculative

Taylor v. Industrial Commission No. 4-06-0412WC Thomas Taylor, a 44 year old truck driver was unloading groceries at a stop on his pre-determined route.  While pushing a two-wheel cart loaded with groceries, he slipped on a ramp and ultimately underwent surgery on his knee.  He was then assigned to duties as a dispatcher and received