Appellate Court Denies Rehearings in Will County Forest Preserve Case

As our readers will recall, in February the Appellate Court made an astonishing decision wherein a shoulder injury was determined not to be a specific loss compensable under Section 8(e) of the Act but rather one to consider under Section 8(d)2, the person as a whole provision.  The court focused on the dictionary meaning of

PENALTIES NOT PERMITTED FOR DELAY IN AUTHORIZING TREATMENT

Hollywood Casino–Aurora, Inc. v. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission No. 2012 IL App 2d 110426WC Gill Vierickl-Iverson was injured while working for Hollywood Casino and received an award which Hollywood did not appeal.  The decision became final on November 19, 2004.  Gill remained under the care of Dr. Lubenow who wrote the claims office on December

Errata: Patel v. Home Depot Redux

Our readers will recall our recent report on the case where the employer, although granted credit for an apparent overpayment of benefits by the Commission, was denied this credit when the claimant pursued a judgment from the circuit court for the sums awarded for TTD, penalties and fees by the Commission.  We were taken aback

The Shoulder Bone Aint Connected to the Arm Bone

Will County Forest Preserve District a/k/a Forest Preserve District of Will County v. IWCC No. M-MR-673 In a shocking reversal of 100 years of practice and precedent, the Appellate Court has determined that a shoulder injury is not covered under the specific loss schedule set forth in Section 8(e)10 of the Act.  Denzil Smothers was

No Credit for Benefits Paid?

Naresh Patel v. Home Depot USA, Inc. No. 2012ILApp(1st) 103217 Naresh Patel filed two claims which were heard together by an Arbitrator who awarded him a total of $22,798.54 in TTD, penalties, and attorneys’ fees.  The Arbitrator also granted Home Depot certain credits pursuant to Section 8(j) of the Act.  The Commission raised the credit

Despite Claimant’s Appeal Penalties Due on Undisputed Benefits

Melinda Jacobo vs. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission No. No. 3-10-0807 WC Melinda Jacobo appealed a Commission decision awarding her compensation and benefits but denying penalties.  Her employer did not.  The claim for penalties was based on her employer having stopped paying benefits after an IME.  The employer ultimately prevailed on that issue, the appellate court

Appellate Court Reverses Total Permanent Award

Professional Transportation, Inc. v. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission No. No. 3-10-0783WC In a rare reversal, the Appellate Court struck down an ‘odd-lot’ permanent total disability award.  The petitioner, Barry Clarke, suffered a career-ending right knee injury which required several surgeries, including a total knee replacement.  He also developed a deep vein thrombosis after the total

Wiedner & McAuliffe Among Top Chicago Firms for Workers’ Comp Law in US

Wiedner & McAuliffe, Ltd. is pleased to announce that the firm’s Workers’ Compensation Law – Employers practice was ranked as a top-tier practice group in the Chicago metropolitan area in the U.S. News – Best Lawyers® 2011-2012 Best Law Firms rankings. Now in its second year, the U.S. News – Best Lawyers Best Law Firms

Circuit Court Has Primary Jurisdiction in WC Coverage Questions

Hastings Mutual Insurance Company v Ultimate Backyard, LLC et al. No. Nos. 1-10-1751, 1-10-3001 (consolidated) The claimant, Javier Vasquez, was injured while working for Ultimate Backyard and filed a claim at the IWCC.  Ultimate’s carrier, Hastings Mutual, began to pay benefits under a reservation of rights but later withdrew its acceptance of the claim and

Understanding the Backlog: Why are WCMSA reviews taking so long?

Our Medicare department recently attended a conference for the National Alliance of Medicare Set-Aside Professionals (NAMSAP).  At that conference, two representatives from CMS discussed issues with WCMSA submissions and explained why the review process is taking longer than ever. As you may know, when a WCMSA proposal is submitted, CMS prioritizes its review in the