BERNADINO BRAVO, Claimant, v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent .

Case summary

Claimant, a highway construction worker injured on the job, received over $100,000 in workers' compensation from his private employer. The court initially denied the State's motion to dismiss based on the collateral source rule, but later dismissed the complaint with prejudice after the parties stipulated that the action had been fully settled and compromised.

Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence

Cases cited: Sallee v. State (1990), 42 Ill. Ct. Cl. 41; Paschal v. State (1991), 43 Ill. Ct. Cl. 229

AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.

Headnotes

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION-Workers’ compensation payments are not a set-off-collateral source rule. Adopting the same logic as in Sallee v. State (1990),42 Ill. Ct. C1. 41, the Court of Claims held that workers’ compensation payments received by a Claimant are not to be set off from any award taken against the State, unless the employer has filed its lien as per section 5 of the Workers’ Compensation Act, in which case the employer’s lien can be satisfied from the award of the Claimant.
NEcLIcENcE-employee of private contractor-personal injuriesstipulation-complaint dismissed. Based on a stipulation of both parties, the Court dismissed with prejudice the Claimant’s action arising from injuries he received on a highway construction project while he was an employee of a private contractor, after the Court had previously ruled that he could maintain an action despite the fact that he had received over $lOO,ooO.OO in workers’ compensation from his employer.
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

LEWIS, DAVIDSON & HETHERINGTON, for Claimant. NEIL F. HARTIGAN, Attorney. General (GURION & LEWIS, by KURT OLSEN, Special Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.

SOMMER, J.

This cause coming to be heard on the motion of the Respondent to dismiss and the Court being fully advised in the premises,

Finds that the Claimant was working on a highway construction project when he was injured. The Claimant’s employer, a private contractor, has paid over $100,000.00 in workers’ compensation payments to the Claimant. The Respondent has moved that this claim be dismissed as the Claimant has received over $100,000.00 “from other sources for the same incident.”

This Court, in Sallee v . State (1990), 42 Ill. Ct. C1. 41, has held that the collateral source rule applies in the Court of Claims as in the Circuit Courts. In Paschal 2). State (1991), 43 Ill. Ct. C1. 229, this Court held that monies received from workers’ compensation are not to be “set-off” and that an injured person, who is not a State employee, may maintain an action for his injuries in this Court even if that person has received over $100,000.00 in workers’ compensation from his employer.

The Paschal decision was filed in 1991, and the opinion appears in this volume at page 229, supra.

It is hereby ordered that the Respondent’s motion to dismiss is denied.

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

SOMMER, J.

This cause coming to be heard on the motion of the Respondent, State of Illinois, to dismiss, and the Court being fully advised in the premises; [*310]

It is hereby ordered that the Claimant’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Stipulation of the parties agreeing that the action has been fully settled, compromised, and adjourned.