Managing Partners

Partners

Associates

Of Counsel

To learn more about Hennessy & Roach services, reach us at:

Chicago:       312-346-5310
Fax:                312-346-5330

St. Louis:      314-231-0770
Fax:                314-231-0990

Springfield:  217-726-0037
Fax:                217-726-0137
 ______________________
140 S Dearborn St.,   7th Floor
Chicago, IL 60603

Stephen J. Klyczek
sklyczek@hennessyroach.com

• Bachelor of Art- cum laude –Northern Illinois University, 1986
• Juris Doctor- Northern Illinois University School of Law, 1990
• Admitted to practice in Illinois in 1990

Professional Affiliations

Central Illinois Adjusters' Association
Greater Peoria Claims Adjusters' Association

Practice Areas

Defense of Workers’ Compensation, Insurance Defense
Third-Party Defense

Significant Arbitration Decisions

1. Adrian Granados v Interlake, Inc 07 IWCC 600

Petitioner, 49 years old, injured his lumbar spine while working as a welder for Respondent. Despite never having surgery, all doctors agreed that Petitioner was not be able to return back to work as a welder due to physical restrictions. Respondent offered a different job to Petitioner within his restrictions. However, after only working the new job for only 2-3 hours, Petitioner went to an emergency room claiming severe back pain. At hearing, Petitioner argued he was permanently totally disabled under Section 8(e) of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act due to the restrictions, his education (high school), and his claim that he was not fluent in English with Spanish being his native language. The arbitrator found that Petitioner was not permanently totally disabled as Respondent had a bona fide job alternative for him. The Commission on review agreed and further found that Petitioner did not attempt to find alternate employment on his own. The Commission did increase the award of permanency pursuant to Section 8(d)(2).

2. Brenda J. Hill v Lincoln Land Oil Co (06IWCC1141)

Petitioner incurred a neck injury while working as a gas station attendant. The arbitrator found an intervening incident of lifting a heavy pot while cooking at home which was mentioned to an emergency room physician by a family member. Based on the intervening incident, the arbitrator denied subsequent lost time benefits and medical expenses. The finding of an intervening incident also mitigated the employer’s liability for permanent partial disability benefits. Upon review, the Commission affirmed the arbitrator’s decision.

3. Bing Gossett vs. ITW/Signode (01 IIC 12)

Petitioner alleged that pre-existing arthritis in both hips and his right knee was aggravated by his work as a machine operator. Petitioner had bilateral total hip replacement and a total right knee replacement. Petitioner asserted that he was permanently and totally disabled from working as a machine operator due to the condition of his hips and right knee. At the time of the alleged aggravation, petitioner was 52 years old. The Arbitrator found that petitioner failed to prove that he suffered an injury which arose out of and in the course of his employment. The Arbitrator relied on a 20 year history of prior arthritic problems throughout his body, including fingers. The Arbitrator also found that petitioner’s testimony in which he frequently lifted 100 pound coils of steel was not credible. The Arbitrator denied all forms of compensation. The Industrial Commission affirmed the Decision on review.

4. Adellar Laye vs. Osco Drug (99 IIC 404)

Petitioner alleged an injury to her lower back which occurred when she lifted and moved a number of packages weighing between 12 to 60 pounds onto a pallet. Petitioner testified that she felt pain in her lower back when she used a hand jack to lift the pallet off the floor. Petitioner stated that she continued to work, moving the boxes off the pallet at a different part of the store. Petitioner did not seek medical treatment for the next 14 days. Petitioner testified that the reason she did not seek treatment for that period of time was that she was taking Tylenol #3 for a recent root canal and therefore did not notice the pain in her lower back until after she stopped taking the medication for her tooth. The Arbitrator found that petitioner failed to prove that she sustained an injury which arose out of and was in the course of her employment. The Arbitrator specifically noted that the petitioner’s contention that her back pain was eliminated entirely by the Tylenol #3 she was taking for her tooth was not supported by competent evidence. The Arbitrator further found that any causal connection between petitioner’s back pain and the accident was speculation due to the fact that petitioner did not treat for her back until two week after the alleged accident. The Arbitrator denied all compensation for petitioner. The Industrial Commission affirmed the Arbitrator’s Decision upon review.