Illinois Appellate Court Decision, 1st District – Decided June 27, 2025
Audio Recording of This Case
This case was successfully argued by Thomas Radja on behalf of the Schaumburg Firefighters Pension Fund. Click below to start the audio. A link to the audio of the oral argument in the Illinois Appellate Court on June 12, 2025 can be found here: https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/courts/appellate-court/oral-argument-audio/
Phillip Ried served as a firefighter and paramedic with the Village of Schaumburg Fire Department from 1985 to 2016 and also worked part-time for McHenry Township Fire Protection District from 1996 to 2016. In 2017, Ried applied for a line-of-duty disability pension, claiming his hearing loss was related to his works as a Schaumburg Firefighter.
Medical Evaluations were admitted during the case which are summarized as follows: Dr. Lieberman, initially attributed hearing loss to aging, but later said it was more likely noise-induced after reviewing a 1995 audiogram. Dr. Samo opined noise exposure contributed to the loss but couldn’t isolate it as the sole cause. Dr. Horwitz believed the loss was mostly age-related or due to non-occupational causes (e.g., genetic or auto-immune). Dr. Orris, Ried’s expert, attributed hearing loss to chronic noise exposure at work and testified Ried had no other risk factors.
Noise exposure reports were submitted by Ried and the Village. The Village’s reports (1999 & 2017) concluded noise levels were within OSHA limits and unlikely to cause hearing loss. Ried’s Expert (Rosenhan) disagreed. According to Rosenhan the older equipment likely exposed Ried to high decibel levels exceeding OSHA standards.
Hearings were held by the Pension Board from May 2018 to October 2019. The Pension Board inquired as to whether Ried wanted the Board to consider an interim non-duty disability award while it litigated the line-of-duty disability claim. Ried initially considered non-duty pension but later withdrew that request to avoid a financial disadvantage. The Pension Board initially denied line-of-duty disability pension in a 3–2 vote finding insufficient evidence linking Ried’s hearing loss to specific or cumulative job-related noise exposures. The Board favored the Village’s experts and Dr. Horwitz’s explanation on the non-occupational cause. After denying the line-of-duty claim, the Board awarded Ried a regular retirement pension with COLA increases and retroactive back retirement pay. Ried challenged the Board’s denial of his line-of-duty disability pension.
On appeal, the Circuit Court reversed the Board’s decision and remanded the case to the Pension Board, citing three main issues: (1) The Board used the wrong legal standard, focusing on a “specific act of duty” rather than the cumulative effects of duty-related noise exposure; (2) The Board’s weighing of medical evidence was illogical, notably dismissing Dr. Samo’s and Dr. Lieberman’s opinions while over-relying on Dr. Horwitz’s, who lacked key evidence (Ried’s 1995 audiogram); and (3) The Board arbitrarily preferred the Village’s noise report, which was based on reconstructed data and equipment Ried did not use, over Rosenhan’s report, which tested the actual equipment Ried used.
On remand, the Board allowed two new trustees to review the prior record, in addition Dr. Horwitz was given Ried’s 1995 audiogram and submitted a supplemental opinion, suggesting mixed causes for Ried’s hearing loss but still questioning the diagnosis of noise-induced loss. After holding hearings on remand, the Board reversed its original denial and awarded Ried a line-of-duty pension, finding his hearing loss was caused in part by cumulative duty-related noise exposure over his 30 years on the job. The Village contested the Board’s authority, arguing the Board had no jurisdiction to grant a line-of-duty pension after previously awarding a retirement pension, and that the Board’s reversal was unreasonable and unsupported by the new evidence.
The case made its way back up to the Illinois Appellate Court. The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the Board’s decision to award Ried a line-of-duty disability pension, rejecting the Village’s legal and factual challenges. The Court held the Pension Board retained jurisdiction to award a line-of-duty pension. The Court held the Board properly followed the Court’s instructions to re-examine all of the expert testimony and noise exposure reports, and the Board had statutory authority under the Illinois Pension Code to award both retirement and disability pensions. According to the Appellate Court, the law does not prohibit awarding a retirement pension and later reversing a denial of duty disability benefits, nor does it require a pensioner to reject one award to seek the other. Further, the Court determined the Board’s granting of a duty disability was supported by the evidence in the record which included testimony from three of four medical experts finding that noise exposure was a contributing factor in Ried’s hearing loss.