The work, the record, and the result.

Larry Pope v. City of Chicago

The claim: Repetitive and acute jackhammer trauma alleged to have caused a carotid artery dissection, stroke, central retinal artery occlusion, and permanent loss of vision in the left eye. IWCC No. 07 WC 53735.

Her role: Lead trial counsel for the City. She developed the evidence, took the depositions, and tried the arbitration record — daily work reports for June through September 2007, the foreman’s testimony on actual jackhammer use, the missing incident report, the shifting accident narratives, the conflicting medical histories, and the alternative causation evidence.

The result: The arbitrator awarded benefits; the Commission reversed, finding neither accident nor causation proved; the circuit court reinstated the award; the Appellate Court, Workers’ Compensation Commission Division, reinstated the denial (2016 IL App (1st) 151922WC-U).

Why it matters: The reversal was won on the record built at trial. Nothing was added later.

Leola Harrell v. City of Chicago

The claim: TTD, MMI, medical benefits, permanency, and benefit-credit issues across lengthy Section 19(b) and review proceedings; date of accident December 11, 2002.

Her role: Trial counsel for the City.

The result: A $114,141.20 credit obtained at arbitration on the payment, medical, and disability record she developed; the Appellate Court affirmed the overpayment credit in 2018 (2018 IL App (1st) 163346WC-U).

Why it matters: A six-figure credit changes net exposure, and it was proved with documents, not argument.

Donna Halters v. City of Chicago

The claim: Four Section 19(h) petitions alleging material increases in disability to the right knee, right arm, cervical spine, and lumbar spine, plus permanent total disability on an odd-lot theory. Case numbers 98 WC 08446, 99 WC 12367, 00 WC 07978, and 00 WC 14135.

Her role: Commission counsel for the City; she wrote the Respondent’s Statement of Exceptions and Supporting Brief.

The record: Four earlier awards, evidence depositions, later work and non-work accidents, full-duty releases, competing orthopedic and primary-care opinions, two vocational experts, and a labor-market survey.

Why it matters: The brief separated four claims, four body parts, and a decade of medicine into one comparison the Commission could decide.

Reynaldo Delgado v. Daniel Schiavone — Circuit Court of Cook County, 2019 L 3780

The matter: The employee sued the third-party driver who caused the compensable accident. The employer was not sued under any theory of liability.

Her role: Counsel for the employer at the Commission and in the circuit court. She intervened to protect the Section 5(b) lien and appeared at mediation for a global resolution.

The result: The mediator recommended a $60,000 settlement with a waiver of the compensation lien. After assessing the civil liability, she declined the waiver, resolved the compensation claim with the lien rights retained, and recovered $42,573.63 of the $60,000 paid by the driver’s insurer.

Why it matters: The lien is an asset. It is not surrendered because a mediator asks.

Juan Saldierna v. Joliet Fruit Market v. Bar-S — Circuit Court of Cook County, 18 L 5161

The matter: A third-party defendant brought the employer into the injured worker’s suit on a contribution claim alleging negligent training for off-site deliveries. The plaintiff demanded $1,100,000 and a waiver of the compensation lien.

Her role: Defended the employer in the circuit court and appeared at the settlement hearing.

The result: She argued the employer’s entitlement to lien recovery — the defendant, not the employer, had been negligent in maintaining the delivery site — and recovered $42,000 under Section 5(b) on the court’s recommendation.

Why it matters: An employer pulled into a third-party case needs a defense and a recovery strategy at the same time.

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois

Her federal work in the Northern District of Illinois has been predominantly the defense of police officers, police departments, and municipalities, including the City of Harvey and the City of Markham, together with employment matters, several litigated through summary judgment. The work was the full file: pleadings, written discovery, document review, party, witness, and expert depositions, institutional witness preparation, dispositive motions, and trial preparation. She prevailed on motions for summary judgment in premises-liability cases for the City of Harvey on more than one occasion.