Falling on a public sidewalk isn't a death knell for an Illinois Workers' Compensation Claim. - Mark P. Loftus

September 26, 2025

Historically in Illinois, employees hurt on the job while in an area used by the general public face a pretty good likelihood that their case will get tossed. A number of Illinois Supreme Court decisions, as well as some Appellate Court decisions, have set fort that if an employee faces the same risk as the general public[i.e. falling on a public sidewalk], well then, his injury was NOT related to his job. In Brais v. Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission, the Third Appellate District[Kankakee] recently wrestled with this issue once again.

In Brais, the injured worker Jane R. Brais worked for the County of Kankakee as a Child Support Coordinator. Her office was in the Kankakee County Courthouse. On December 26, 2006 at approximately 11:00 a.m., she was returning to her office from a work meeting at a nearby building. Normally, County employees entered the Courthouse through a private entrance in back. That entrance however was closed at 9:30 a.m. So Brais had to enter the building through the front door[a public entrance]. She was about to enter the building when he heel caught in a crack in the sidewalk. She fell and suffered a serious injury to her left wrist. Ultimately she needed a significant piece of surgery on her injured wrist. Ms. Brais then filed a Workers’ Compensation claim.

At a hearing before the Workers Compensation Commission, the arbitrator ruled that the injuries suffered by Ms. Brais did not arise out of her employment. The basis for that ruling was because Brais had been injured on a public sidewalk. According to the arbitrator’s line of thinking because the general public faced the exact same risks entering the building, the risk was not specific to Brais’ job. The arbitrator tossed the case.

Brais appealed, first to the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission – which acts as the first line of appeal in Workers’ Compensation cases. Brais got no relief there – the Commission ruled the arbitrator was right. So Ms. Brais appealed to the Circuit Court of Kankakee County. The Circuit Court also agreed with the arbitrator. So Brais took her case to the Appellate Court.

The Appellate Court decision in a concise and well-written opinion, noted a number of very critical facts. First, Brais was on that cracked sidewalk because of her job. She had to attend a meeting in a nearby building. Additionally, Brais didn’t have any options. Because the employee door was locked, she had to use the front door. The Court found that it didn’t matter that the general public also used those doors. The Court found that “when an employee is injured in an area which is the only route to work, and there is hazard[like a cracked sidewalk] the hazard becomes part of the employment.” The Appellate Court overturned the decision of the Commission as well as the decision of the Circuit Court. It is nice to see employees getting a break now and again in the courts.

Red Tesla sedan driving on a road.
September 26, 2025
According to online reports, Tesla ignored a $60 million dollar settlement overture in the wrongful death case that ultimately resulted in a $242 million dollar jury verdict against the car maker. The lawsuit grew out of 2019 crash where a Tesla Model S with Autopilot engaged, plowed through a Florida intersection and crashed into a Chevy Tahoe. Neima Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo were standing near the Tahoe when the Tesla crashed into it. Leon was killed and Angulo suffered serious injuries. A lawsuit was filed against Tesla, asserting that although the Autopilot feature was engaged, the vehicle did not brake. Florida law permits a monetary demand to be issued before trial. If the defendant fails to accept the demand within 30 days it is considered rejected. If the plaintiff then goes to trial and secures a verdict 25% greater than the offer, the defendant is on the hook for plaintiff’s investigative expenses and attorneys’ fees. Tesla is appealing the jury verdict, citing “substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.”.
Johnson's baby powder container, white bottle, blue text, red seal, 400g.
September 26, 2025
This important ruling got kind of lost in the news cycle. A couple weeks ago, the United States Supreme Court refused to vacate a $2.2 billion dollar ovarian cancer verdict against Johnson & Johnson[“J & J”]. The verdict was originally returned by a Missouri jury in 2018 on behalf of 22 women. The original verdict was actually $4.7 billion but a Missouri Appellate Court reduced the award to $2 billion. Each of the women claimed that there was asbestos and asbestos-laced talc in J & J talcum powder products they used, and they developed ovarian cancer as a result. Asbestos is known to cause cancer. Talc, in its raw form is often found in close proximity to naturally occurring asbestos. When J & J mined talc, that talc sometimes contained asbestos. And that asbestos sometimes found its way into J & J personal hygiene products. [In 2019, J & J recalled 33,000 bottles of J & J products after FDA testing found asbestos in test samples]. J & J, has known of the risk of asbestos contamination in talc products since the 1970’s. Some 21,000 plus ovarian cancer cases are pending against J & J throughout the United States.
Movie poster for
September 26, 2025
Reports today say that DuPont and the State of New Jersey have reached a $2 Billion dollar settlement arising out of DuPont’s release of “forever chemicals” into soil, wetlands and other areas in New Jersey – and then forgetting to clean up the mess they made. The settlement with DuPont is reportedly the largest environmental settlement ever obtained by a state. “Forever chemicals” – also known as PFAS(referring to per and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are man-made chemicals that are used in an extensive variety of products as they are both water and grease-resistant. The chemicals are linked to litany of health problems, including increased risk of certain cancers(kidney, testicular and breast) liver damage, thyroid issues and reproductive problems(such as decreased fertility, low birthweight and developmental problems). NJ.Com is reporting that one of the sites where DuPont created munitions created such significant contamination in the environment that over 300 homes required filters to prevent toxic chemicals from seeping into their homes. The settlement terms provide that DuPont will spend $875 millions cleaning up the contamination and set aside another $125 million to cover other damages that may arise. Additionally, DuPont will also set p a $1.2 billion funding source and reserve fund of $475 million to ensure that even if the company fails to make payments, or goes bankrupt, public funds will not be used. For a stark introduction into the nature of PFAS, check out Dark Waters, a compelling and criminally underrated movie based on the decades old fight waged by attorney Robert Bilott against DuPont for contaminating West Virginia rural communities.