Case name: Kovack v. DuPage Airport
Authority, 13 ILWCLB 223 (Ill. Ind. Comm. 2005).
Ruling: The Commission held that a
claimant who sustained serious injuries to both of his wrists as a result of
work-related accidents was permanently totally disabled under the odd-lot
category.
What it means: The fact that there
might be some jobs available to a disabled claimant does not negate a
finding of PTD under the odd-lot category, where the claimant realistically
is not employable in a labor market while competing with non-disabled
potential employees.
Summary: The claimant, a building
maintenance technician, fell off a platform at work and injured his right
wrist. He underwent surgery and returned to part-time work while undergoing
physical therapy. He subsequently fell backward off a ladder at work,
fracturing his left wrist. After two surgeries to the left wrist, the
claimant continued to experience limited range of motion and tremendous pain
in both wrists and did not return to work. The Commission found the
claimant permanently totally disabled under the odd-lot theory. Relying on
testimony from the treating surgeon and a vocational counselor, the
Commission determined there was no stable labor market for the claimant
based on his condition, age, experience, training and education.
In so holding, the Commission relied on the
testimony of the treating surgeon, who opined that the claimant was
restricted to primarily sedentary duty with no lifting greater than 10
pounds and no repetitive wrist and forearm motions. Also convincing was the
testimony of the claimant’s vocational counselor, who credibly testified
that although there might be jobs available to the claimant, he
realistically was not employable in the competitive labor market given his
age- 64 at the time of the hearing, limited education and physical
capabilities, and presentation. The claimant’s work history prior to
working for the defendant involved mainly blue-collar jobs, including
printing engraver, laborer, forklift operator and manufacturing. His job
with the defendant was in building maintenance, which included HVAC,
plumbing, carpentry and snow removal. The Commission also pointed to the
claimant’s limited but failed attempts to obtain employment. Based on this
evidence and testimony, the Commission found the preponderance of the
credible evidence indicated the claimant was permanently and totally
disabled from employment.
