294 Ill. App. 3d 365 - Kozak v. Moiduddin’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
10 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 60 Ill. 2d 418 - Borowski v. Von Solbrig · 48 Ill. 2d 1 - Ullman v. Wolverine Insurance · 108 Ill. 2d 106 - J. L. Simmons Co. Ex Rel. Hartford Insurance Group v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. · 161 Ill. 2d 357 - Patton v. Carbondale Clinic, SC · 285 Ill. App. 3d 545 - Bidani v. Lewis
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where the injury or death for which compensation is payable under this Act was caused under circumstances creating a legal liability for damages on the part of some person other than his employer to pay damages, then legal proceedings may be taken against such other person to recover damages notwithstanding such employer’s payment of or liability to pay compensation under this Act. In such case, however, if the action against such other person is brought by the injured employee or his personal representative and judgment is obtained and paid, or settlement is made with such other person, either with or without suit, then from the amount received by such employee or personal representative there shall be paid to the employer the amount of compensation paid or to .be paid by him to such employee or personal representative including amounts paid or to be paid pursuant to paragraph (a) of Section 8 of this Act. *** If the injured employee or his personal representative agrees to receive compensation from the employer or accept from the employer any payment on account of such compensation, or to institute proceedings to recover the same, the employer may have or claim a lien upon any award, judgment or fund out of which such employee might be compensated from such third party. In the event the employee or his personal representative fails to institute a proceeding against such third person at any time prior to 3 months before such action would be barred, the employer may in his o”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““In the present case, [the employee] was injured during the course of his employ at Yellow Freight, an injuiy that he alleges Dr. Rembos exacerbated by his negligent treatment. Before Yellow Freight knew of the plaintiffs’ medical malpractice claims, it agreed to pay compensation for [the employee’s] medical expenses, temporary total disability and permanent partial disability — as required by [the Act], Shortly after the settlement, plaintiffs filed the present action seeking compensation for, among other things, medical expenses, loss of mobility, and disability, as well as loss of earnings and earning capacity. In our opinion, these damages translate roughly into medical expenses, temporary total disability and permanent partial disability caused by the malpractice. Under these facts, the distinct possibility exists that Yellow Freight already paid compensation benefits to [the employee] for damages that actually arose from Dr. Rembos’ alleged medical malpractice; thus, Yellow Freight paid compensation for an injury (the negligent treatment) ‘caused under circumstances creating a legal liability for damages on the part of [Dr. Rembos] to pay damages.’ Accordingly, Yellow Freight should remain free to assert its lien under section 5(b), in order to prevent [the employee] from securing a double recovery.” Kozak, 294 Ill. App. 3d at 369-70 , 689 N.E.2d at 221 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.