Village of Roselle v. Board of Trustees of the Roselle Firefighters' Pension Fund
2021 IL App (2d) 200360
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2021Background
- Ryan Case, a firefighter hired by the Village of Roselle in June 2015, had prior, intermittent reports of low back pain and a 2013 work-related muscle strain but no disabling condition on pre-hire imaging or records.
- At his May 2015 preemployment physical Case answered that he had not had prior back injuries; the Village later claimed those answers were false.
- On September 18, 2016, while on duty moving bottled water for a department open-house, Case felt a pop, developed leg weakness; MRI showed an acute right L5–S1 herniation compressing the S1 nerve root, and he later underwent spinal fusion and permanent lifting restrictions.
- Three independent medical examiners, after reviewing all records (including pre- and post-injury MRIs), unanimously concluded the September 2016 event caused Case’s permanent disability.
- The Roselle Firefighters’ Pension Board granted a line-of-duty disability pension, finding the bottle-moving was an act imposed by department rules and that preemployment misstatements were not a basis under the Pension Code to deny benefits.
- The Village obtained judicial review; the circuit court reversed (finding the injury was not an "act of duty" because it did not involve saving life/property and that the Board could consider the preemployment misrepresentations). The appellate court reversed the circuit court and affirmed the Board.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board could deny a duty disability pension based on preemployment misrepresentations | Village: Board may consider/apply fraud provisions and its fiduciary duty to deny benefits to an applicant who misrepresented medical history. | Board/Case: Pension eligibility is governed solely by §4-110 elements (disabling injury, act of duty, causation); fraud statutes direct the board to notify the state’s attorney, not to deny pensions. | Board lacked authority under the Code to deny a §4-110 pension for preemployment misstatements; it must follow §4-110 and, if fraud is suspected, notify the state’s attorney. |
| Whether Case’s injury occurred while performing an "act of duty" | Village: Loading water was not an "act of duty"—the Board’s reading would make any on-duty act ordered by a superior qualify; circuit court said act must be for saving life/property. | Board/Case: "Act of duty" includes acts required by department rules or orders; Case was ordered to perform the task and could face discipline for refusing. | The Board correctly applied the Code’s definition: if an act is imposed by department rules or regulations (or by ordinance), it qualifies as an "act of duty" without needing to be for saving life/property. Case’s task qualified. |
| Standard of review for interpreting "act of duty" | Village: De novo statutory interpretation. | Board/Case: Clear-error review of the administrative finding. | Court did not decide definitively which standard applied because the result would be the same under either; it affirmed the Board’s factual and statutory conclusion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gaffney v. Board of Trustees of the Orland Park Fire Protection District, 2012 IL 110012 (agency powers limited to statutory grants)
- Marconi v. Chicago Heights Police Pension Board, 225 Ill. 2d 497 (pension boards owe fiduciary duties to pay only qualifying benefits)
- O'Callaghan v. Retirement Board of Firemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund of Chicago, 302 Ill. App. 3d 579 (acts required by rules/regulations constitute "acts of duty")
- Lindemulder v. Board of Trustees of the Naperville Firefighters' Pension Fund, 408 Ill. App. 3d 494 (appellate review addresses agency decision, not trial court)
- AFM Messenger Service, Inc. v. Department of Employment Security, 198 Ill. 2d 380 (standard for reversing agency under "clearly erroneous" review)
- Jensen v. East Dundee Fire Protection District Firefighters' Pension Fund Board of Trustees, 362 Ill. App. 3d 197 (§4-110 uses §6-110 definition of "act of duty")
- People v. Beachem, 229 Ill. 2d 237 (statutory construction principles)
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (articulating "definite and firm conviction" standard for overturning findings)