An appeal court in Illinois on Monday denied additional workers compensation-specific disability benefits to an injured beverage distributor as it claims did not seek rehabilitation services in the light of his diminished abilities derived from a back injury that aggravates a degenerative condition. 19659002] John Bohentin had worked in the beverage distribution business for over 30 years and for North Aurora, Illinois-based Euclid Beverage LLC at the time he injured his back while beating a cooler in a food store in 2011, an injury that led several doctors to diagnose and deals with an injury they testify to aggravates a condition that is common with age, as documented in Euclid Beverage v. Illinois Workers Compensation Commission et al. (John Bohentin, Appellant ), filed in the Appellate Court of Illinois, the Second Division Compensation Committee of Elgin.
Two months later, in 2012, a doctor allowed him to work with restrictions: not lifting more than 15 pounds and switching between sitting and standing. Mr Bohentin then submitted for benefits related to his injury, which the employer considered reimbursable, record status.
An arbitrator in 2016 reviewed the case of Bohentin and found that he was eligible for several benefits including temporary total disability 2011-2012, maintenance benefits from 2012 to 2015, designed to help supplement his income while seeking employment or training per Illinois. code and permanent partial disability of $ 434 per week from 2015 through the duration of his disability.
Euclid then submitted a review before the State Employment Compensation Commission, which partially accepted the arbitrator's award – a temporary total disability of $ 713 per week for 22 weeks and $ 714 for 167 weeks of maintenance – but changed the permanent partial disability award to one " Percentage person as a whole price "limited to $ 643 per week for 200 weeks for 40% loss of the man as a whole.
In 2017, Euclid submitted for review to the DuPage County Circuit Court, which confirmed disability benefits that settled but was waived the maintenance benefits award, "that it was found that the record did not show that the applicant participated in a vocational rehabilitation program or (a) self-directed search" between 2012 and 2015. Mr Bohentin appealed.
Monday's ruling was in line with the pioneer court, claiming that state law only means that an employer pays maintenance benefits if an injured worker was or is enrolled in a professional rehabilitation program.
"The applicant never sought or attained employment after termination from Euclid," the ruling states. "As such, rehabilitation should be neither mandatory nor appropriate as the applicant did not show an intention to return to work, even if he could."
Neither Euclid Beverage nor the Illinois Workers Compensation Commission officials were immediately available for comment.