Excellent ruling from the Appellate Court, Workers’ Compensation Division. The Court also clarifies the Commission still rules on all evidence and applicable workers’ compensation law in a de novo setting—they do not have to follow or even consider the ruling of the Arbitrator.
Editor’s comment: We have to give credit where credit is due. We also note there was some academic question among Illinois workers’ compensation practitioners as to whether the Commission had to provide deference to the ruling of the Arbitrator when they considered affirming or overruling it—the answer is no. The Appellate Court has clarified any concerns in a very detailed ruling. We point out the main issue was manifest weight and it is moderately unusual to see a 22-page ruling that affirms a claim on its facts.
We also caution all practitioners to be wary about filing appeals to the Circuit and Appellate Courts solely on the facts. Many observers now feel such appeals by either side may be viewed as frivolous and result in sanctions under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 745(b) against the appealing law firm. We want to clarify this Court did not award sanctions but we are seeing claim after claim come down with requests for sanctions where there are no true matters in dispute and facts are not supposed to be disputed unless there is substantial evidence to the contrary of the Commission’s ruling.
In Hosteny v. Workers’ Compensation Commission, (No. 1-08-3238WC 1st Dist. Dec. 29, 2009), the Court ruled that although an injured worker’s testimony alone might be sufficient to establish an injury arose out of and in course of employment, such testimony alone is not enough when the total circumstances show manifest weight of evidence is against it.
The Court expressly ruled it is within the Workers’ Compensation Commission’s sole purview to assess credibility and weigh and resolve conflicts in evidence. The Commission’s findings are to be accorded deference. The Appellate Court noted there was a delay in reporting the accident to both the employer and to his medical providers. The Court also noted claimant’s prior experience with workers’ compensation led to a reasonable inference claimant did not suffer compensable accidents on two of the three reported dates.
We point out to President Doug Whitley and the hard-working folks at the Illinois State Chamber of Commerce, this ruling highlights how important it is to get the right Commissioners in place if the defense side of the bar makes inroads in the fall elections. Please consider joining the State Chamber in their fight to make Illinois Workers’ Compensation more palatable for Illinois business.
Please don’t hesitate to reply with thoughts and comments or post them on the blog. If you need the website of this ruling, we are also happy to provide it.
