Court Opinion

ID: 9520281
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:35:08.837212+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:53.872430
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE RAKOWSKI, specially concurring: I agree that the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not bar Marshall from claiming that his current condition is causally related to the September 2, 1981, incident. I also agree that the amended version of section 13 — 309(b) is not jurisdictional. I further agree that Peoria County Bellwood Nursing Home is instructive as to when Marshall’s alleged disability occurred. The date of alleged disability, however, is nonetheless a question of fact. Although the majority holds that intermittent hospitalization will toll the limitations period as a matter of law, no authority is cited for such a proposition. I respectfully submit that none exists. As such, this cause should be remanded to the retirement board to make that determination in accordance with the instructions given in this opinion. Once that determination is made, the circuit court may analyze both the disability occurrence date and causal connection issues under a manifest weight of the evidence standard. Finally, although not expressly stated in the opinion, I assume the majority is concluding that the doctrine of laches should not apply under the facts of this case. With that, I agree.