Simpson v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n
2017 IL App (3d) 160024WC
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Curtis Simpson, a long‑time Peoria firefighter who later served in administrative roles, suffered a heart attack on January 12, 2008 and later received stent placements and a duty disability pension.
- Simpson filed for workers’ compensation under the Act alleging his heart/cardiovascular disease was work‑related; section 6(f) creates a rebuttable presumption that firefighters’ heart/vascular conditions arise from firefighting exposures.
- The arbitrator awarded permanent partial disability benefits; the City sought review before the Commission, which reversed—finding the City rebutted the 6(f) presumption and that Simpson failed to prove causation.
- Medical evidence: claimant’s expert (Dr. Weaver) opined occupational exposures and chronic firefighting hazards may have caused his cardiovascular disease; employer experts (Drs. Fintel and Scott) attributed the disease to non‑occupational risk factors (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, obesity, age, male sex).
- The Commission credited the City’s cardiology evidence (finding Simpson atherosclerotic and "a powder keg waiting to explode") and found Simpson’s heart attack occurred off‑duty while doing home chores; circuit court confirmed; Simpson appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether section 6(f) presumption (firefighters’ heart disease causation) applies and how it is rebutted | Simpson: as a long‑service firefighter, presumption applies to his heart disease and the City must not be allowed to escape liability absent strong proof | City: presumption applies but was rebutted by medical evidence showing non‑occupational causes (risk factors) and the event occurred off‑duty | Court: presumption applied to Simpson; employer produced sufficient evidence of other causes to "burst the bubble" so presumption ceased to operate |
| Quantum of evidence required to rebut the statutory presumption | Simpson (and dissent): employer must show employment was not a contributing cause; mere assertion of other causes insufficient without addressing occupational exposure | City: need only produce some evidence of an alternative cause so Commission may decide causation on the record without presumption | Court: adopts Johnston approach—statutory presumption is rebutted by some evidence of an alternative cause; City met that burden |
| Whether Simpson proved by preponderance that his heart attack was caused by firefighting exposures | Simpson: occupational exposures, chronic smoke, stress and shift work contributed to disease; Dr. Weaver’s opinion supports causation | City: expert cardiologists showed extensive atherosclerotic disease attributable to traditional risk factors; event occurred while off duty performing home tasks | Court: Commission’s factual finding that Simpson failed to prove causation is not against manifest weight; credited City experts and affirmed denial of benefits |
| Admissibility / scope of amici briefs | AFFI amicus relied on materials outside the record; City moved to strike | AFFI sought to support claimant; IML sought leave to file amicus for City | Court: struck portions of AFFI brief that were de hors the record; allowed IML to file amicus out of time |
Key Cases Cited
- Franciscan Sisters Health Care Corp. v. Dean, 95 Ill. 2d 452 (Ill.) (discusses legislative presumptions and standards for rebuttal)
- Diederich v. Walters, 65 Ill. 2d 95 (Ill.) (articulates "Thayer's bursting bubble" theory for rebuttable presumptions)
- Sisbro, Inc. v. Industrial Comm'n, 207 Ill. 2d 193 (Ill.) (causation under the Act: employment need only be a contributing cause)
- Beelman Trucking v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Comm'n, 233 Ill. 2d 364 (Ill.) (standard for manifest weight review of Commission factual findings)