Source: https://secure.heylroyster.com/areasofpractice/print.cfm?pageID=3&specialtyID=37&print
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 07:49:19+00:00

Document:
Heyl Royster has a long tradition of helping businesses and insurers handle workers’ compensation claims in an aggressive but fair and cost-effective manner. In the past, many employers perceived workers’ compensation as just another cost of doing business. In recent years, that perspective has changed as workers’ compensation costs have escalated.
In some states, increased benefit amounts, more frequent penalty awards, and an “employee friendly” Workers’ Compensation Commission have contributed to cost increases. At the same time, legal and economic issues in workers’ compensation cases have become more complex. Medicare Set-Asides, Social Security and disability offsets, frequent claims of permanent total disability, temporary partial disability and wage differential benefits, utilization review, and penalty avoidance are all issues that require attorneys with highly specific knowledge and experience.
Heyl Royster has decades of experience representing insurance carriers, TPAs, and employers in the management and defense of Workers’ Compensation claims. Our attorneys are highly respected by the arbitrators, administrative law judges, and commissioners, in the venues in which we practice, for our experience and integrity. In addition to regularly appearing at docket and review locations, we also counsel clients in related areas such as risk management, ADA, retaliatory discharge, and FMLA. Our clients often ask us to help them achieve the employment culture that best suits their business model.
Our success is based upon an early analysis of exposure, a realistic understanding of the potential for successful defense, and aggressive trial tactics where appropriate. Through pre-litigation counseling, we assist clients in aggressively managing claims to conclusion that are compensable and need to be paid, and we aggressively defend those cases where the evidence supports a defense. Our reputation for handling claims in this fashion often gives us an edge with arbitrators, administrative law judges, and commissioners when we appear before them for trial.
Our appearance at a Commission hearing will usually alert the arbitrator or the administrative law judge that there may be a substantial problem with a claimant’s case. We aggressively defend our clients when workers are excessive or unreasonable in their demands or their injuries are not caused from a work-related incident. Representing all types of employers, our clients range from small businesses to large manufacturers, including carriers, self insureds, and self insureds with third-party administrators. In addition, we have an Appellate Advocacy Practice dedicated to handling workers’ compensation appeals.
We literally “wrote the book” on Workers’ Compensation practice in Illinois – two of our partners, Kevin Luther and Bruce Bonds, authored “Illinois Workers’ Compensation Law” published by Thomson Reuters (2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018). Our Workers’ Compensation attorneys closely follow trends and developments both at the Workers’ Compensation Commissions and in state legislatures. We served as technical advisers to the Joint Employers during the negotiations that culminated in the 2005 amendments to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act. One of our partners is an Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, where he has taught workers’ compensation law to upper level law students for more than a decade. We are also actively involved in the College of Workers' Compensation Lawyers (CWCL), the Employment Law Committee of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce, the Illinois State Bar Association section on workers’ compensation, and the Illinois Self-Insureds Association.
We are highly regarded within the medical community for our defense of workers’ compensation cases. Due to our extensive experience in multiple venues, we are able to advise our clients on specific doctors and medical providers. We also offer in-house seminars and annual presentations on legal trends affecting workers’ compensation cases, as well as comprehensive updates on recent cases, rate information, and statutory changes. By maintaining a close working relationship with clients, we can help manage their Workers’ Compensation costs through our extensive experience with employers’ varied workers’ compensation environments.
With seven Midwestern offices, we can provide our clients the unique advantage of working with one defense firm in multiple locations. This economy of size is virtually impossible to obtain when dealing with a number of law firms on a smaller scale. By handling a greater volume of cases for a client and having offices close to each of the venues at which we appear, we can offer high quality legal service at a lower cost-per-case. A client who retains multiple law firms throughout the area cannot achieve this type of efficiency and consistency.
Koch v. Edge Elevator (1999) - The petitioner in this workers’ compensation case worked with his son erecting pole buildings for farmers and rural businesses. Edge Elevator hired the petitioner to frame and erect a pole building on its premises. During construction the petitioner sustained a severe back injury that required surgery and an inability on his part to return to work. The petitioner claimed that he was not an independent contractor of Edge Elevator, but was under Edge Elevator’s control so that it was responsible for the injury under the worker’s compensation act. The arbitrator found in favor of the petitioner and issued an award worth over $250,000. The appellate court, workers’ compensation division, ultimately reversed the decision and agreed with Edge Elevator that the facts showed that the petitioner was an independent contractor and not under Edge Elevator’s control. The award was vacated and the claim denied.
Dodson v. Industrial Commission 308 Ill. App. 3d 572 (5th Dist. 1999) Issue of whether employee's fall on wet grass slope while walking to her car after work arose out of her employment.
Ealy v. Industrial Commission 189 Ill. App. 3d 76 (1989) Compensability of slip and fall outside of employer's premises.
Pryor v. Industrial Commission 266 Ill. App. 3d 497 (1994) Accident occurring on personal farm owned by president of corporation is not compensable.
Radosevich v. Industrial Comm’n 367 Ill. App. 3d 769 (4th Dist. 2006) Section 19(i) interest runs from date of award; Section 2-1303 interest commences only when circuit court enters judgment on award under Section 19(g).
Bernardoni v. Industrial Comm’n 362 Ill. App. 3d 582 (3d Dist. 2005) Frye standard for evaluating admissibility of expert or scientific evidence applies to workers' compensation proceeding; Illinois does not recognize claims for multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS).
Pearson v. Industrial Comm’n 318 Ill. App. 3d 932 (3d Dist. 2001) Outlines steps to establish volunteer fireman status and rejects application of emergency doctrine.
Deichmueller Const. Co. v. Industrial Comm’n 151 Ill. 2d 413 (1992) Employer's appeal bond must be signed by individual with authority to bind employer to financial obligation represented by bond; attorney cannot sign unless authorized by said individual.
S & H Floor Covering, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Comm'n 373 Ill. App. 3d 259 (4th Dist. 2007) Court opened the door for giving "an extra degree of scrutiny" to the Commission's decision where the Commission makes credibility determinations regardless of the arbitrator's findings.
Farris v. Industrial Comm'n 357 Ill. App. 3d 525 (4th Dist. 2005) Held that in cases where the employee loses five or more days of work during the 52 weeks prior to the injury, the lost time (to the extent not due to the fault of the employee) should be deducted from the wage calculation.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.