Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Disability Law Blogs -> Doherty & Progar Workers' Comp

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Disability Law

: Doherty & Progar Workers' Comp

Illinois Supreme Court Considers Time Limit For Filing Claim For Repetitive-Trauma Injury

By Michael Progar

ADVERTISEMENTS

Section 6(d) of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act requires an employee to file a workers' compensation claim within three years after the date of accident. That limitation poses no difficulties when the accident is a discrete event. However, in the case of a repetitive-trauma injury, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, the employee must prove that both the injury and its causal link to the employee's work became plainly apparent to a reasonable person on some date within the limitations period. That manifestation date is an issue of fact for the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission.

The Illinois Supreme Court recently considered that issue in a case involving an employee of an insurance company, Durand v. Industrial Commission. In that case, the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission found that the employee's injury manifested itself more than three years before she filed her claim, and that her claim was therefore time barred. The Commission did not consider the issue of whether the employee's work activities were the cause of her claimed injuries. The employee argued on appeal that the Commission's finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence.

The court discussed prior opinions of the Illinois Appellate Court, noting that the manifestation date in repetitive-trauma cases was typically considered to be either the date on which the employee required medical treatment, or the date on which the employee could no longer perform work activities. The facts showed that the employee suspected that she had carpal tunnel syndrome as early as September or October of 1997, and the Commission had found the date of accident to be some unspecified date during that period of time.

As the Supreme Court noted, however, although the employee suspected that her hand and wrist pain were related to her work, she had limited knowledge about carpal tunnel syndrome and did not seek medical treatment until August 2000. She was first conclusively diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome in September 2000. She filed her claim in January 2001.

The court concluded that a reasonable person would not have known of the injury and its potential relationship to the employee's keyboard work until 2000, when the employee's pain forced her to seek medical treatment, and therefore her claim was timely. The case was remanded to the Workers' Compensation Commission to determine whether the employee's injuries were caused by her work activities. The court stated: "We decline to penalize an employee who diligently worked through progressive pain until it affected her ability to work and required medical treatment."