History
  • No items yet
midpage
Martin v. Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund of the Village of Shiloh
2017 IL App (5th) 160344
Ill. App. Ct.
2017
Read the full case

Background

  • David Martin, a vested Shiloh police detective, was injured (cervical spine) as a passenger in an unmarked squad car that was rear-ended while stopped at a traffic light after returning from courthouse duties. He was on duty at the time.
  • Martin had been at the St. Clair County courthouse obtaining subpoenas and filing traffic citations as part of an investigation before the accident.
  • Martin applied for a line-of-duty disability pension under 40 ILCS 5/3-114.1; the Board denied line-of-duty status but awarded a not-on-duty (50%) pension under 3-114.2.
  • Martin sought judicial review; the circuit court reversed the Board and awarded line-of-duty benefits. The Board appealed.
  • The appellate court reviewed the legal question de novo (statutory interpretation of “act of duty”) and affirmed the trial court, holding Martin was acting in a capacity involving special risk and thus qualifies for a line-of-duty disability pension.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether Martin’s injury was "incurred in or resulting from the performance of an act of duty" under 40 ILCS 5/3-114.1 Martin: He was on duty performing detective/court-related tasks and was in a squad car subject to police responsibilities; focus is the capacity in which he was acting. Board: He had completed courthouse business and was merely returning; being on duty or in a stopped car is an ordinary risk and not an "act of duty." Court: Affirmed that the relevant inquiry is the capacity in which the officer acted; Martin was performing duties unique to police and was thus entitled to line-of-duty benefits.

Key Cases Cited

  • Johnson v. Retirement Board of the Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 114 Ill. 2d 518 (1986) (defines focus on the capacity in which officer acts; line-of-duty awarded when injury results from performance of act of duty)
  • Marconi v. Chicago Heights Police Pension Board, 225 Ill. 2d 497 (2006) (administrative-review standards; review agency decision, identify standards for fact/law/mixed questions)
  • Robbins v. Board of Trustees of the Carbondale Police Pension Fund, 177 Ill. 2d 533 (1997) (stress-related disabilities and line-of-duty analysis)
  • Morgan v. Retirement Board of the Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 172 Ill. App. 3d 273 (1988) (tasks like filling out reports held not to involve special risk)
  • Wagner v. Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund, 208 Ill. App. 3d 25 (1991) (officer injured while serving notice held to be performing an act of duty; focus on capacity)
  • Jones v. Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund, 384 Ill. App. 3d 1064 (2008) (officer injured while driving on patrol entitled to line-of-duty benefits; routine patrol involves special risk)
  • Sarkis v. City of Des Plaines, 378 Ill. App. 3d 833 (2008) (physically raising railroad gate not an act ordinary citizens perform; capacity controls)
  • Fedorski v. Board of Trustees of the Aurora Police Pension Fund, 375 Ill. App. 3d 371 (2007) (evidence technician in squad car denied line-of-duty where duties not unique to officers)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Martin v. Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund of the Village of Shiloh
Court Name: Appellate Court of Illinois
Date Published: Nov 29, 2017
Citation: 2017 IL App (5th) 160344
Docket Number: NO. 5–16–0344
Court Abbreviation: Ill. App. Ct.