Jacobo v. WORKERS'COMPENSATION COM'N
959 N.E.2d 772
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- In December 1998, Jacobo injured her back in a work-related accident involving a forklift.
- Arbitrator awarded TTD, PTD, medical expenses, and penalties for unreasonable delay in paying benefits.
- Commission affirmed substantive awards but reversed penalties on April 10, 2007; denied penalties based on asserted reasons.
- Employer delayed payment of undisputed portions of TTD, PTD, and medical expenses through June 24, 2009 while appealing penalties.
- Second petition for penalties was filed May–June 2008; appellate and circuit court proceedings followed, culminating in remand for penalties and fees.
- This appeal challenges the Commission’s denial of penalties under sections 19(l), 19(k), and 16 for the delayed undisputed benefits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 19(l) penalties apply to undisputed benefits withheld. | Jacobo argues delay lacked good cause and triggers 19(l) penalties. | New Breed contends delay was justified; penalties not warranted. | Yes; 19(l) penalties mandated for undisputed delay without good cause. |
| Whether 19(k) penalties and 16 attorney fees should be awarded for the delay. | Delay was deliberate/bad faith to avoid timely payment. | Appellate decision suggested no penalties; delay not improper. | Yes; awarding 19(k) penalties and 16 fees is warranted; denial was an abuse of discretion. |
| Whether the employer had a legitimate reason to withhold undisputed portions during ongoing appeals. | Zitzka and McMahan show withholding undisputed benefits is improper. | Appeals on penalties anticipated; undisputed awards may be deferred. | No; withholding undisputed awards pending all issues resolved is improper. |
| Whether the standard for 19(k) penalties requires bad faith beyond mere delay. | Delay was intentional or in bad faith. | Delay stemmed from ongoing disputes; not clearly improper. | Yes; a higher standard than 19(l) applies; delay must be deliberate or in bad faith. |
Key Cases Cited
- McMahan v. Industrial Comm'n, 183 Ill.2d 499 (Ill. 1998) (higher standard for penalties under 19(k); deliberate or bad-faith delay)
- Zitzka v. Industrial Comm'n, 328 Ill.App.3d 844 (Ill. App. 2d Dist. 2002) (undisputed awards must be paid promptly; penalties proper when delay not justified)
- R.D. Masonry, Inc. v. Industrial Comm'n, 215 Ill.2d 397 (Ill. 2005) (objective reasonableness standard for 19(k)/(l) penalties; standard discussed)
- Beelman Trucking v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n, 233 Ill.2d 364 (Ill. 2009) (manifest weight review of Commission decisions; penalties framework)
- Crockett v. Industrial Comm'n, 218 Ill.App.3d 116 (Ill. App. 3d Dist. 1991) (context on income protection and timely payment of benefits)