ChicagoGenevaMadison

Daniel T. Crowe Of Counsel

Phone: (312) 458-1603
Fax: (312) 460-8299
Email: dcrowe@cyp-law.com
Assistant Name: Mackenzie Meeks
Assistant Phone: (312) 458-1608
Dan joined Chilton Yambert Porter in 2001. His practice focuses on Workers' Compensation. He has tried and reviewed hundreds of cases before the Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission. In addition, he has handled dozens of cases through the appeals process in the Circuit Courts and the Appellate Court- Workers' Compensation Division. Dan's practice has permitted him to carve out an expertise representing defendants in actions brought under the Jones' Act and retaliatory discharge. Dan's experience includes common law and maritime defense; he has tried many cases to verdict before a jury.

Dan has conducted several seminars for claims professionals on such topics as "The Basics: What Every Claims Professional Needs to Know About Illinois Workers' Compensation", subrogation techniques, the art of negotiating workers' compensation case, and the 2005 and 2011 Amended Workers' Compensation Act. In 2015, Dan made a presentation at the IICLE 2nd Annual Workers' Compensation Law Institute regarding the Respondent's perspectives on "Evidentiary Considerations in Claims Involving the Intoxication Defense."

Leading Lawyers Awards

Daniel T.
Crowe
Peer Selected 2019
Daniel T.
Crowe
Peer Selected 2021

Practice Areas

Workers' Compensation

Bar Admissions

  • State of Illinois (1978)
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of !llinois
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of !llinois Trial Bar

Education

  • J.D. IIT Chicago Kent College of Law, 1978
  • B.A. Loyola University, 1973

Professional Affiliations

  • Illinois State Bar Association
  • Illinois Workers' Compensation Lawyers Association

Representative Cases

  • Alvarado v. Ill. Workers' Compensation Commission, 2020 IL App (2d) 191105WC-U
  • Brown v. Menard, Inc., 13 IWCC 267
  • Dassinger v. Ill. Workers' Compensation Commission, 2016 IL App(3d) 150423WC-U
  • Ek v. Ryan, Inc. Central, 13 WC 33608
  • Gaynor v. Community Unit School District 200, 12 IWCC 893
  • Johnson v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc., 14 IWCC 633
  • Lawmorie-Dickey v. Dixon Public School District 170, 10 WC 16548
  • Lodovico v. FCL Graphics, Inc., 14 WC 4951
  • Parro v. Industrial Commission 260 Ill. App.3d 551, 630 N.E.2d 860 (1st Dist., 1993)

Honors & Awards

  • Leading Lawyers 2019, 2020 and 2021

Publications and Speaking Engagements

  • "The Intoxication Defense in Illinois Workers' Compensation Cases": Chicago Bar Association, 10/4/2018.
  • Evidentiary Considerations in Claims Involving the Intoxication Defense" presentation at the IICLE 2nd Annual Workers' Compensation Law Institute, February 2015

News Articles

  • Illinois Appellate Court Reverses Circuit Court Decision Regarding Discretionary Bonuses

    Dan worked a recent Appellate court case, Alvarado v. Illinois Workers' Compensation Commission and Menard, Inc., d/b/a Menards, is an example of the work Dan has been performing for employers for the past forty years. Click here for a summary of the case as well as the outcome of the stellar work provided by Dan to our client.

    In the Alvarado case, only one matter was at issue, i.e., whether a bonus Menard's paid to its employee should be included in the calculation of the injured worker's average weekly wage. The literature Menards distributed to its employees was that the bonus was discretionary and did not create a continued right. The arbitrator entered a finding in the petitioner's favor that the bonus was wages and should be included in the calculation of the average weekly wage. The Commission panel on review reversed the arbitrator. The petitioner filed a Circuit court review of the Commission's decision. The Circuit court reversed the commission. Dan then filed an appeal to Workers' Compensation division of the Illinois Appellate Court.

    The Alvarado case was a death case. If the Circuit Court's ruling was upheld by the Appellate court, the decedent's average weekly wage would have been increased by $100.00 per week. Over the course of 25 years, this would amount to an increase in payments of $130,000.00; the most cash value of this increase, using a 4% discount rate, would amount to $81,234.92. The stakes in this case were high as the Appellate Court's decision would impact every Illinois employee who received a discretionary bonus.

    In his brief and oral argument, Dan pointed out the policy issues and the impact that an affirmation would have on employers and employees. The employer's claim costs would increase dramatically to the extent that employers may end their bonus programs. In addition to the policy issue dan cited cases from several states on the issue of whether discretionary bonuses created contractual employment rights.

    In a unanimous decision, the Illinois Appellate Court found Dan's arguments persuasive and reversed the Circuit Court. Illinois employers may not award discretionary bonuses to their employees without worry of increasing their workers' compensation claim costs and employees do not have to worry that their employers will discontinue the bonuses.

    This decision probably saved Menards and other companies millions in workers' compensation costs.

    This is the type of services that Dan and the Chilton Yambert Porter LLP's workers' compensation team have been providing and will continue to provide our clients.
By viewing this page you agree to our Privacy Disclosure Statement, located here.
website design