Court: Appellate Court of Illinois; May 24, 1990; Illinois; State Appellate Court
Tanya Koshel appeals the trial court's denial of her motion to strike a workers’ compensation lien filed by Cook County in her personal injury case. The court affirms the trial court's decision. Koshel was injured while working for the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County when she slipped on a waxed floor at the Daley Center. Following the incident, she received workers’ compensation benefits from Cook County and later settled her personal injury suit, which Cook County consented to. Subsequently, Cook County sought to recover the benefits paid through a lien on her settlement.
Koshel contended that Cook County was not her employer under the Workers’ Compensation Act and had no obligation to pay her benefits, thus disputing Cook County's right to subrogation. However, the court did not need to determine whether Cook County was her employer at the time of the injury. It concluded that, regardless, Cook County had a right to subrogation based on its legal obligation to pay workers’ compensation benefits owed by the Clerk, as outlined in the Clerks of Courts Act. The Act mandates the county board to provide compensation and related expenses for the Clerk and employees, with "other expenses" including the payment of workers’ compensation benefits. Therefore, Cook County is deemed responsible for these payments, affirming its right to recover the benefits it provided to Koshel.
Koshel contends that Cook County cannot seek subrogation for payments made, arguing those payments were intended to benefit the Clerk of the circuit court rather than himself. He cites Estate of Woodring v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. and In re Estate of Hammond to support his position, where courts ruled that medical insurers lacked subrogation rights against proceeds of a parent's estate since the payments were meant to settle the parents' debts and did not benefit the minors' estates. However, the court finds that the current case does not share factual similarities with the cited cases, rendering them irrelevant.
Koshel further argues that the Workers’ Compensation Act only allows employers to lien an employee’s third-party recovery related to workers’ compensation payments. Yet, Illinois case law has established that third parties, not just employers, can assert workers’ compensation liens based on subrogation principles. The court sees no valid reason to depart from this precedent and affirms the trial court's denial of Koshel's motion to strike Cook County’s lien.
In a cross-appeal, Cook County challenges the trial court’s denial of its motion for sanctions against Koshel under section 2—611 of the Code of Civil Procedure, asserting that Koshel's motion to strike was not legally grounded. The court, however, determines that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the sanctions, noting that the case involves a significant question of first impression regarding Cook County’s obligation to pay workers’ compensation benefits. Consequently, the orders of the circuit court of Cook County are affirmed.
