Johnston v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n
2017 IL App (2d) 160010WC
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Kevin Johnston, a firefighter with >15 years' service, suffered a cardiac arrest on February 5, 2014, and later underwent quadruple bypass surgery. He had multiple cardiovascular risk factors (long smoking history, obesity, possible diabetes, family history).
- Johnston filed for workers’ compensation alleging his heart attack occurred while shoveling snow at the firehouse; he had no memory of the events immediately before the arrest.
- Fellow firefighters testified Johnston arrived late, was reported to have gone outside to shovel, and was found unresponsive outside near a snowblower; testimony conflicted on whether he was actively shoveling.
- Employer-ordered cardiology exam by Dr. Fintel concluded Johnston’s severe triple-vessel disease was due to nonoccupational risk factors and that work as a firefighter did not cause his underlying disease de novo; Dr. Berry (treating cardiologist) acknowledged firefighter occupational risk generally but did not opine that Johnston’s exposure caused his disease.
- The arbitrator denied benefits, finding the employer rebutted the Section 6(f) presumption and that Johnston’s cardiac event did not arise out of employment; the Commission and circuit court affirmed, but the Commission erroneously remanded for further benefits determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the employer rebutted the Section 6(f) presumption that Johnston’s heart/vascular disease arose out of firefighting employment | Johnston: evidence of occupational exposure and higher firefighter cardiac risk makes the presumption applicable and not sufficiently rebutted merely by pointing to personal risk factors | Employer: Dr. Fintel’s opinion and medical records show nonoccupational causes (long-term smoking, obesity, family history, possible diabetes) sufficient to rebut by producing some contrary evidence | Held: The statute requires only ordinary rebuttal (“some evidence”); employer rebutted the presumption with Dr. Fintel’s opinion that nonoccupational risk factors caused the disease; Commission’s finding not against manifest weight of evidence |
| Whether Johnston’s cardiac event (heart attack) arose out of and in the course of employment (i.e., occurred while clearing snow) | Johnston: circumstantial testimony that he went outside to clear snow and presence of snowblower/cleared parking spot support finding he was removing snow when he collapsed | Employer: witnesses conflicted and none observed Johnston actively shoveling; facts do not establish he was performing work when the event occurred | Held: Commission’s finding that the heart attack did not arise from a work activity (clearing snow) is not against the manifest weight of the evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Diederich v. Walters, 65 Ill. 2d 95, 357 N.E.2d 1128 (1976) (rebuttable-presumption doctrine; once contrary evidence is introduced presumption disappears and issue is decided on evidence)
- Franciscan Sisters Health Care Corp. v. Dean, 95 Ill. 2d 452, 448 N.E.2d 872 (1983) (Thayer bursting-bubble approach to rebuttable presumptions)
- Sisbro, Inc. v. Industrial Comm’n, 207 Ill. 2d 193, 797 N.E.2d 665 (2003) (claimant need only show occupational risk was a cause of condition of ill-being)
- Land & Lakes Co. v. Industrial Comm’n, 359 Ill. App. 3d 582, 834 N.E.2d 583 (2005) (standard for manifest-weight review of Commission fact findings)
- Thomas v. Industrial Comm’n, 78 Ill. 2d 327, 399 N.E.2d 1322 (1980) (procedural authority referenced regarding remand—Commission’s remand here held erroneous)