8-14-23; Indiana WC Board Testing New PPI Portal Starting Right Now; IL Appellate Court, WC Div Orders Some Medical For Police Officer But Not All; IL WC Arbitrators Coming/Going and more

Synopsis: Indiana Worker’s Compensation Board is Testing a new PPI Submission Portal Starting Now, 8/14/23. Article and analysis by our IN WC Defense Team Leader, Kevin Boyle, J.D.

Editor’s comment: IWCB is doing voluntary testing of their PPI Submission Portal for the rest of August 2023, and it will be mandatory by October 1, 2023.

Today, August 14th, 2023, the Indiana Worker’s Compensation Board will begin testing a PPI Submission Portal.

The Board anticipated that it will be available for use by all adjusters on September 1, 2023. Your Indiana adjusters may receive email blasts before the “go live” date. The portal will only be an available to adjusters for the time being. 

We caution use of the new PPI Portal to submit PPIs will become mandatory on October 1, 2023. Please immediately start needed processes for this important change.

The PPI Submission Portal will be accessed through Gateway. The PPI Portal will allow adjusters to not only submit all documentation including the State Form 1043, Medical Report and Waiver electronically, but to monitor the status of each submission, once accepted, through review and IWCB approval. There also will be a Help document available on the Board’s website as well as on Gateway.

For more details, here’s a link to the 15 page Gateway User Guide that explains it all, too:

https://www.in.gov/wcb/files/PPI-Adjuster-portal-user-guide_July-2023.pdf

 

We appreciate your thoughts and comments. Feel free to ask any questions or concerns from Kevin at kboyle@keefe-law.com. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

 

 

Synopsis: IL WC Appellate Court rules East St. Louis Police Officer Gets WC Medical Expenses for Knee, Back, but Not Hip. See Gene’s Thoughts on How to Handle Such Claims, Moving Forward.

 

Editor’s comment: In East St. Louis Police Department v. IWCC, No. 5-22-0536WC, 05/22/2023, unpublished, the Illinois Appellate Court ruled that an injured police officer was not entitled to an award of payment for medical expenses for the treatment of his left hip, but he was entitled to awards for treatment of his left knee and lumbar spine.

Claimant Franklin suffered injuries in August 2018 while working as an East St. Louis police officer. According to Franklin, he injured his back, left knee and bilateral hips when he tackled a person running from the scene of a traffic stop.

The East St. Louis Police Department conceded Franklin had sustained injuries that arose out of and in the course of his employment, but it contended that his condition was not causally related to the August 2018 incident. Claimant Franklin had problems with his hips, spine and left knee that predated the August 2018 incident, and they were the subject of two previous workers' compensation claims. From what I can tell in research, Claimant Franklin had ten prior IL WC claims against the same Department.

Prior to the event in question, in 2013 to 2016, Dr. Mall repeatedly recommended surgery to repair a tear of the anterior cruciate ligament in Franklin’s left knee, but he declined the procedure when he learned that it would not be covered by his workers’ compensation benefits. From 2016, when Claimant last saw Mall, until August 2018, Franklin performed his full, unrestricted duties. Until the August 2018 incident, Franklin asserted, he experienced no symptoms from the ACL tear. After the incident, Franklin claimed his knee became unstable, causing him to trip or lose his balance.

Dr. Pitts reported no evidence that the left knee had been aggravated by the August 2018 incident, but Dr. Paletta  opined the event “aggravated” the preexisting pathology. Dr. Robson opined that the incident had caused a temporary exacerbation of Claimant Franklin’s degenerative disc disease in his spine, but Dr. Gornet testified an aggravation of the lumbar spine was evident in the before-and-after diagnostic studies.

An IL WC Arbitrator heard the claim and found the opinions of Drs. Paletta and Gornet to be credible, but she found Claimant Franklin lacked credibility. The Arbitrator found a causal relationship between the August 2018 incident and the conditions of Franklin’s lumbar spine and left knee. She found no causal relationship for Franklin’s hip condition.

The Arbitrator awarded all past medical expenses for which Claimant Franklin sought reimbursement, including those for treatment of the cervical spine and the left hip, and for diagnostic procedures on the right hip, as well as future medical expenses for treatment of the lumbar spine, left knee and right hip. The Arbitrator also awarded temporary total disability benefits through August 2018, when Franklin declined an offer of light-duty work within restrictions.

On administrative review, the IL Workers’ Compensation Commission panel affirmed the Arbitrator's findings on causation and the award of medical benefits, except the award of prospective medical expenses for the right hip. The Commission panel said an award of future medical expenses for a mere strain of the right hip was unwarranted.

The Commission panel also extended TTD benefits through the date of the arbitration hearing and struck language from the arbitration decision that required the Police Department to indemnify Franklin from any claims by health providers or third parties arising from expenses for which they claimed credit.

A circuit court judge confirmed the Commission panel’s decision.

On appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court, WC Division noted even though Franklin took the position that a magnetic resonance imaging scan of his neck was related to the August 2018 incident, he declined to seek compensation for medical expenses associated with treatment of his neck. Thus, the Court ruled, the question of whether the Police Department should pay bills for the treatment of Franklin’s neck was not a contested issue and no causation conclusion was required.

The Appellate Court said it was unclear why the arbitrator's decision omitted a causation conclusion on the left hip, though, since Franklin alleged an injury, and the parties requested a written decision on this issue. Since the Arbitrator's decision lacked a finding of fact as to whether the condition of the left hip was causally related to the August 2018 incident, the Court ruled, the Commission panel lacked authority to order the payment of medical expenses without a finding of fact and conclusion of law from which the order results.

The Court ruled the Commission panel did not make a finding that was against the manifest weight of the evidence by finding that the August 2018 incident aggravated the preexisting problem in Franklin’s left knee or finding the incident had aggravated his low-back condition.

The Commission’s award of TTD benefits through the date of the arbitration hearing was not against the manifest weight of the evidence, either, the Court ruled, since the treating physician opined Franklin was physically incapable of any work.

In short, the portion of the Commission's decision ordering payment of medical expenses for treatment of the left hip was vacated and the circuit court's judgment was reversed insofar as it affirms that portion of the Commission’s decision.

From Your Editor--Consider a 911 Desk Job for Police/Fire Claimants Like This

My advice to Village/City/Town administrators in dealing with Claimants like Mr. Franklin is to transition them to 911 Desk jobs. Please consider Claimant Franklin has at least 10 IL WC claims at whatever cost. While we don’t want him to be injured again, it would appear he is almost certain to have another and another, ad infinitum. I would feel any active police work would aggravate something and he is going to again be on the dole.

Right now, as you read this, www.indeed.com has 28 pending East St. Louis area police dispatch jobs that would be perfect for such claimants. All of them pay well and have solid benefits. There are always openings, all across our State. As Claimant Franklin is a trained police officer, you wouldn’t have to train him in “cop talk” to man a 911 line. Please also note the 911 desk job will allow a worker to stand or sit at their option—there are headsets that can be worn during 911 desk duty. The position is sedentary with options for changing positions.

https://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=Emergency+Dispatcher&l=East+Saint+Louis%2C+IL&from=mobRdr&utm_source=%2Fm%2F&utm_medium=redir&utm_campaign=dt&vjk=b23e3c28caf632ab

We appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

Synopsis: Some Current IL WC Arbitrators re-appointed; Some Depart and Two New Ones Enter the IL WC Fray.

Editor’s comment: On Friday, July 21, 2023, Governor JB Pritzker announced the reappointment of the following Arbitrators:

Jeanne AuBuchon                                        Paul-Eric Seal

Linda Jean Cantrell                                      Rachael Sinnen

Bradley Gillespie                                          Charles Watts

Gerald Napleton                                            Raychel Wesley

We congratulate each of the Arbitrators on their reappointment.

Arbitrators David Kane and Steven Fruth have announced their retirement, effective at the end of the month. Arbitrator Kane has been in that job since 1990! We congratulate Arbitrator Kane and Arbitrator Fruth and wish them good health and happiness upon their retirement.

Finally, Governor Pritzker has appointed two new Arbitrators to serve upon the retirement of Arbitrators Fruth and Kane. The new Arbitrators are:

Jennifer E. Bae

Ms. Bae has been a practicing attorney, with more than 25 years of experience, in various capacities. She is currently the Director of Employee Discipline for the Cook County Sheriff’s Office. As the Director, she is responsible for the handling of disciplinary matters for the more than 6000 employees of the office. She has acted in this capacity since 2019.

In the past, she has been self employed as a private practitioner, worked as a Staff Attorney for the City of Chicago, was a Member of the Cook County Sheriff’s Merit Board and worked as an Assistant State’s Attorney in Cook County. As an ASA, she worked in the Appellate, Traffic and Domestic Violence Divisions. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago Law School.

James Byrnes

Mr. Byrnes has been a practicing attorney for more than 30 years, with an emphasis on workers’ compensation matters. He is currently a partner at the firm of Ganan & Shapiro, in Chicago. He has been with the firm since 2002.

Mr. Byrnes has previously been an Associate Attorney at the firms of Freeborn & Peters and the Law Office of Patricia Cassiday. Additionally, Mr. Byrnes was a Staff Attorney at the IWCC, working with then Commissioner Linzey Jones, Jr. As is evident, Mr. Byrnes has a long career in the workers’ compensation field. He earned his Juris Doctorate Degree at the University of Illinois.

We congratulate Ms. Bae and Mr. Byrnes on their appointment. We are certain they will bring strong professionalism, accuracy and fairness to their new posts.

8-10-2023; New Law Allows Observer Attendance at WC IME's with Video; Staffing Agency management in our State Just Changed with New Law; Murder at Arby's--Does WC Act Block Negligent Hiring Claim

Synopsis: New IL Law Allows Observer(s) Attendance at Work Comp IME's with Video.

 

Editor’s comment: IL SB 1748 was signed by the Governor and is now law. We assume but cannot confirm the driving force behind this change is ITLA or the IL Trial Lawyers Association that is one of the biggest political donor organizations in this State. The new legislation says:

 

Section 5. The Code of Civil Procedure is amended by changing Sections 2-1003 and 2-1007.1 as follows:

 

    (735 ILCS 5/2-1003)  (from Ch. 110, par. 2-1003)

    Sec. 2-1003. Discovery and depositions.

    (a) Discovery, such as admissions of fact and of genuineness of documents, physical and mental examinations of parties and other persons, the taking of any depositions, and

interrogatories, shall be in accordance with rules.

    (b) (Blank).

    (c) (Blank).

    (d) Whenever the defendant in any litigation in this State has the right to demand a physical or mental examination of the plaintiff pursuant to statute or Supreme Court Rule, relative to the occurrence and extent of injuries or damages for which claim is made, or in connection with the plaintiff's capacity to exercise any right plaintiff has, or would have but for a finding based upon such examination, the plaintiff has the right to have his or her attorney, or such other person as the plaintiff may wish, present at such physical or mental examination. The plaintiff also has the right to designate an additional person to be present and video record the examination. The changes to this Section by this amendatory Act of the 103rd General Assembly apply to actions commenced or pending on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 103rd General Assembly.

 

We are confident this new legislative language applies to IL WC claims. It is possible IME doctors may increase their charges to deal with three folks being in their examination rooms.

 

An issue this new law might create is a possible malpractice action against a Claimant lawyer who doesn’t take advantage of the law to have someone present and/or video an IME.

 

If this practice becomes widespread, it would end the silly assertion, particularly from some Claimant attorneys in southern IL, that an IME doctor only saw the examinee for a couple of minutes. The duration of the IME would be documented in the video.

 

Please also note the video may show Claimant acting in a fashion contradictory to their claim. I have reviewed WC IME’s where the examinee outlined an injury to the wrong side of their body!

 

We asked an IME doc who we consider to be extraordinarily knowledgeable about this situation and got this response:

 

I’ve have IME’s videotaped on occasion, usually in personal injury cases and not WC. I have no issue with being recorded. I do a very typical and straightforward evaluation and I’ve nothing to hide. On occasion, the video captures inconsistencies or shows the patient doing something they has said that they are unable to do. There is almost always a rep from the patient’s lawyer’s office as well, and that is also fine for me. I do set ground rules that any observer has to be completely mute, cannot gesture or make any other actions that might direct the patient’s responses. I tell the rep/observer they get one warning, and if they ‘coach’ a second time I would stop the exam, but that has never been an issue.

 

My recommendation for everyone who has to deal with any controversy about this new law is to take it to the Arbitrator assigned. Our IL WC Arbitrators are aware of the new law and I am sure they will act in a professional and fair manner to resolve any dispute.

 

We seek your thoughts and comments. Please do not hesitate to post them on our award-winning blog at keefe-law.com/blog

 

Synopsis: HB 2862 becomes IL law greatly changing Staffing Agency management in our State.

Editor’s comment: IL House Bill 2862 is now the law in this State and was effective as of July 1, 2023. This bill creates significant changes to the Illinois Day and Temporary Labor Services Act (820 ILCS 175/).

Like most changes to IL law, there was no crying need for any of this and it continues IL anti-business and pro-litigation trend.

Among various changes, here are the major issues all Staffing Co. Managers will need to memorize:

  • Right of Workers to Refuse Assignments to Third-Party Client Locations Where Labor Disputes Exist

Staffing agencies may not send a worker to a client where there is a pending strike, lockout, or other labor issue without informing the worker, in writing and in a language understood by the worker, of the labor dispute and the worker’s right to refuse the assignment “without prejudice to receiving another assignment.”

  • Equal Pay for Equal Work

Staffing agency workers assigned to a client for more than ninety calendar days must be paid, by the staffing agency, at least the rate of pay along with equivalent benefits as the lowest-paid directly hired employee of the client performing at the same level of seniority and the same or substantially similar work.

Comparative work includes “substantially similar skill, effort, and responsibility … performed under similar working conditions.”

  • Requirement of Labor Agencies and Third-Party Clients to Take Steps to Provide Oversight of Worker Safety

Staffing agencies have a statutory responsibility to provide some safety oversight of workers at third-party client worksites.  The third-party client also has related safety responsibilities under the amendments.

  • Illinois Attorney General Can Now Seek Suspension or Revocation of Registration of a Staffing Agency for Violating the Act

It has long been unlawful under the Day and Temporary Labor Services Act for a staffing agency to operate without registering with the State of Illinois. Now, the Illinois attorney general will have the authority to request that a circuit court suspend or revoke the registration of a staffing agency for violating the Day and Temporary Labor Services Act.

  • Civil Penalties May Be Brought by “Interested Parties”

If an interested party has a reasonable belief that a staffing agency or client violated the Day and Temporary Labor Services Act, the party may bring a civil action in a county where the alleged offenses occurred after exhausting remedies with the Illinois Department of Labor.

  • Increased Registration Fees and Penalties

The annual fee to register a labor agency with the Illinois Department of Labor has tripled to $3,000 per agency (up from $1,000) and $750 for each branch office (up from $250).  A staffing agency or client that violates the Day and Temporary Labor Services Act will be subject to increased penalties.

From a WC perspective, remember both the staffing agency and its client are jointly responsible for work injuries. Primary liability is with the employer at the time of the injury, unless there is a written agreement to the contrary. If you need help with any staffing agency WC issue, send a reply.

We seek your thoughts and comments. Please do not hesitate to post them on our award-winning blog at keefe-law.com/blog

 

 

Synopsis: Murder at Arby’s—Does the IL WC Act Block a Negligent Hiring Claim?

 

Editor’s comment: IL WC Exclusive Remedy Provision Bars Mother's Suit Over Son's Murder by Co-Worker

 

In Price v. Lunan Roberts Inc., et. als, No. 1-22-0742, issued 08/08/2023, Decedent Price and an individual named Thomas were the only employees working the night shift at an Arby's restaurant in Hickory Hills, IL. Surveillance video showed Thomas clocked in for his shift at 10:04 p.m. About two minutes later, Price was seen on video gesturing toward Thomas. Thomas walked away from where he was preparing food and exited the surveillance camera. When Thomas returned into view of the camera, he was carrying a kitchen knife. 

The video depicted Thomas grabbing Price and he stabbed him several times. Decedent Price was able to escape through the back door but died as a result of his injuries, having suffered 27 stab wounds. Thomas fled but was later arrested and charged with murder.

Decedent Price’s mother filed suit against Arby's and Thomas. She alleged Defendants were liable for the negligent hiring, retention and supervision of their employees. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case and later filed a motion for summary judgment. They argued they were not liable because the mother’s exclusive remedy was under whatever coverage might be provided in the IL Workers' Compensation Act.

The trial judge granted the motion and an appeal was perfected before the IL WC Appellate Court.

The Appellate Court ruling explained the Workers' Compensation Act generally serves as the exclusive remedy for a person who is injured during the course of employment. However, when the injury results from a personal conflict between employees unrelated to their work, the Workers' Compensation Act may not bar a civil suit. In this case, the mother argued there was evidence that the murder was the result of a purely personal dispute between Price and Thomas. According to their supervisor, Price and Thomas frequently discussed video games during their shift. Price also sometimes gave Thomas rides home from work and gave him a portable video game console.

A forensic examination of Price's phone revealed text messages with an unknown person and appeared to reference drug transactions and indicated the unknown person was involved in similar transactions with Thomas. But the mother also admitted she did not know of any personal disputes between Thomas and her son. During the course of the criminal case against Thomas, no motive was conclusively established for his actions, either.

“The fact that Price and Thomas had some degree of a personal relationship does not mean that the incident was caused by a purely personal dispute,” the Appellate Court said. "Even if there is some evidence of a personal relationship between Price and Thomas outside of work, there is no competent evidence in the record that the attack was motivated by a purely personal dispute."

The Appellate Court affirmed denial.

To read the court’s decision, click here.

We seek your thoughts and comments. Please do not hesitate to post them on our award-winning blog at keefe-law.com/blog

7-5-2023; "Artifical Intelligence" Comes With Less-Than-Intelligent Programming; New IN WC Rates and more

Synopsis: Real-Life Lawyers remain smarter than Artificial Intelligence!! Well… some of us anyway. Thoughts/comments by John P. Campbell, J.D.

Editor’s Comment: We have all seen and read recent reports of how Artificial Intelligence programs like ChatGBT will revolutionize many areas of business. There are even predictions such technology will drive many folks in various industries out of work with the breakthrough program’s amazing ability to put together essays, arguments and otherwise compile data in an organized manner.

Well, you may not want to fire your attorneys and send your lap-top to court for you just yet….

A federal judge in New York City is threatening sanctions against attorneys for submitting a brief with citations … to fabricated cases!

While verifying case citations  within the brief filed with the federal court, Senior U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York found the pleading was “replete with citations to nonexistent cases.” YIKES!!

Upon further inquiry to the attorney for filing a brief loaded with bogus citations, the judge came to find out the research for case-law was completed not by the lazy lawyers, or even a sloppy paralegal, but rather, ChatGPT!!

The embarrassed attorney was reported to be a veteran practitioner, but admitted in an affidavit that several of the cases had fabricated citations which were produced by Artificial Intelligence software ChatGPT. In his explanation, the attorney asserted he has never utilized ChatGPT as a source for conducting legal research prior to this occurrence and therefore was unaware of the possibility that its content could be false.

It was further alleged that ChatGPT had “assured” the attorney that the cases cited were real “and can be found in reputable legal databases, such as LexisNexis© and Westlaw©,” according to the attorney’s affidavit. We find this excuse to have little merit. Using a new and relatively untested program to develop an argument for your client is bad enough, but to not even check the case citations to verify accuracy may lead to sanctions against the attorney.  

Technological developments in recent decades have certainly improved efficiency in the practice of law, just as it has in other industries. On-line research tools such as Lexis©  and Westlaw©  save hours of research time, formerly achieved via hours and hours scouring a law library.  However, when it comes to crafting unique arguments for the specific facts of each case, it’s hard to imagine any computer could employ the nuance needed to zealously represent clients in litigation. The problem relates to programming, in our view.

Nick Critelli, the Chair of the ISBA Ethics Committee published this:

DO NOT use ChatGPT and other AI platforms as legal research tools. While they can be helpful in thought processing, they are not a substitute for legal research tools. If you ask for a legal citation to support a proposition, the citation will most likely be FAKE. For example, when I ran a test here is what I received: "Case precedent such as "In re Estate of Robeson, 824 N.W.2d 222 (Iowa 2012)" reinforces the standard for removal of an executor/administrator for cause under Iowa Code §633.675, and the Administrator's conduct, in this case, fulfills the criterion set out therein." Looks good and is persuasive --- EXCEPT the case and statutes are FAKE. The case at that citation is actually a Michigan Court of Appeals case Stand Up for Democracy v Sec'y of State, not even remotely related to the issue.

So I confronted ChatGPT about its fake citations and here is the reply:

"We are writing to bring your attention to an emerging concern in the legal community regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and specifically ChatGPT in the preparation of legal briefs and other legal documents. While AI technology undoubtedly provides numerous benefits, recent instances have raised serious concerns about the accuracy and reliability of the cases and statutes it may cite as an authority.

It has come to our attention that AI-generated content, including legal briefs, may sometimes include references to fictional cases or statutes. This poses a significant risk, as it can undermine the credibility of the arguments presented and potentially mislead the court or other legal professionals involved in the case.

We strongly advise all legal practitioners to exercise caution when relying solely on AI-generated content and take appropriate measures to verify the accuracy of the citations provided. While AI can be a valuable tool in legal research and document drafting, it should not be solely relied upon without proper human review and validation."

Our best advice is to stick with your flesh and blood attorneys who write their own briefs and cite cases they actually researched and read before filing with the court!

We appreciate your thoughts and comments. Please post them on our award-winning blog.

 

Synopsis: Indiana WC New TTD and PPI Rates Changed for Injuries On and After July 1, 2023.

 

Article and analysis by our IN WC Defense Team Leader, Kevin Boyle, J.D

Editor’s comment: Indiana TTD and PPI Rates Went Up For New Injuries beginning on and after July 1, 2023.

The Indiana WC rates haven’t changed in a very long time, so this is a big development.

 

You don’t need to increase those rates for injuries that happened before 7-1-23. The new rates apply only for new injuries/incidents that occur on and after 7-1-2023.

 

You can also always find the updated Indiana WC rate chart on our law firm website, too: www.keefe-law.com.

 

Or send a reply to Kevin at KBoyle@keefe-law.com.