Illinois Appellate Court, First District, November 8, 2024
The Illinois Appellate Court reversed the Pension Board’s which terminated continued disability benefits to the plaintiff.
The Plaintiff was awarded a duty disability in 2017 based upon a cervical fusion and right shoulder arthroscopy after being involved in a traffic crash in an unmarked squad car while on duty. After a hearing in 2022, the Board discontinued duty disability benefits. Each year Dr. Orris had found the Officer continued to be disabled. However, in 2022, the Board selected a different physician, Dr. Neal to conduct the IME. Dr. Neal opined that the right shoulder and neck condition was not disabling and was not causally related to the work injury. At a hearing before the Board, the plaintiff submitted medical documentation in support of continued disability. After the Board’s physician reviewed the documentation, he concluded that the officer could not safely effectuate an arrest, however he maintained the reason for any disability was not caused by the work injury. The plaintiff requested a continuance at the initial hearing not wanting to take an ordinary disability verses a duty disability. This request was refused by the Board, and the Board ultimately terminated disability benefits. Thereafter, the CPD refused to reinstate the officer finding that she was not medically qualified to return to duty.
The Circuit Court reversed the Board’s termination of duty disability benefits. The Board then filed an appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court. The Illinois Appellate Court likewise reversed the Board’s termination of duty disability benefits. The court found that where the CPD would not return the officer to active service, she had “carried her burden of proving that she was disabled, that is, that she had a physical condition which made her incapable of performing any assigned duty and that no position within her limitations was offered to her.”
In this case, the Board raised an additional argument that it denied the disability because the cause of the disability was no longer because of the shoulder and neck but was because of an an unrelated psychological issue. The Court held that the Board waived this argument because the Board’s attorney failed to make this argument until the reply brief. Because the attorney failed to address the argument until the reply brief, the Court held that the argument was forfeited.
In sum, the Illinois Appellate Court found the Officer entitled to continued duty disability benefits. Of note, the Court also awarded attorney fees and costs in this case. (C) Radja Collins Law 2025