Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Line of Duty Compensation
Download PDF

In re Linda J. Caisse

33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 333 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1979-12-28 No. 00170
Disposition: (No. 00170-Claimant awarded $20,000.00.) Award: $20,000.00 Agency: Paxton Police Department
Cite as: In re Linda J. Caisse, 33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 333 (1979)
Line of Duty Compensation 33 awarded 1970s In re Linda J. Caisse 33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 333 1979-12-28 (No. 00170-Claimant awarded $20,000.00.) /opinions/v33-p0409-1/

In re APPLICATION OF LINDA J. CAISSE.

Case summary

Claimant sought compensation as beneficiary of her husband, a police officer killed in the line of duty. The court found the claim compensable under the Law Enforcement Officers and Firemen Compensation Act and awarded $20,000.

Claim type: Line Of Duty Death

Statutes cited: Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 48, par. 281 et seq.; Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 48, par. 283(a); Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 48, par. 282(e)

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

Headnotes

  1. WILLIAM J. SCOTT, Attorney General (FRANCIS M. DONOVAN, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.
  2. LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICEFS AND FIREMEN COMPENSATION Am-killed in line of duty- shooting. The surviving spouse of a city policeman was awarded death benefits under the Law Enforcement Officers and Firemen Compensation Act where the evidence established that the officer was killed in an exchange of gunfire when he responded to a call to assist a State trooper who had stopped several speeding vehicles on an interstate highway.

This claim arose from the death of a police officer employed by the police department of the City of Paxton. The Claimant seeks payment of compensation as the decedent’s beneficiary pursuant to the provisions of the Law Enforcement Officers and Firemen Compensation Act, (hereafter, the Act). Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 48,par. 281 et se9.

The Court has reviewed the application for benefits submitted on the form prescribed and furnished by the Attorney General, a written statement of the decedent’s supervising officer, and a report by the Illinois Attorney General’s office. Based upon these documents, the Court finds as follows: [*334] 1. That the Claimant, Linda J. Caisse, is the wife of the decedent, and in the absence of a designated beneficiary, section 3(a) of the Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 48, par. 283(a)) provides that any award hereunder shall be paid to the surviving widow. 2. That the decedent, William 0. Caisse, was a police officer employed by the Paxton Police Department in Paxton, Illinois, and was engaged in the active performance of his duties, within the meaning of section 2(e) of the Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 48, par. 282(e)), on April 7, 1979. 3. That on said date, decedent had commenced his duties at 8:OO p.m. The statement of the decedent’s supervising officer shows that Officer Caisse responded to a call for help from State Trooper Mike McCarter on this date during his tour of duty. Documents on file with the Office of the Illinois Attorney General show that Trooper McCarter stopped several speeding vehicles on 1-57, and, he encountered difficulty with a subject, and that he and Officer Caise, who arrived to aid Trooper McCarter, were killed by gunfire at the scene. The approximate time of death of Caisse was 9:15 p.m. The Coroner’s Certificate of Death lists Officer Caisse’s immediate cause of death as a gunshot wound.

We find, therefore: (a) that Officer Caisse was killed in the line of duty as defined in section 2(e) of the Act; and (b) that the proof submitted in support of this claim satisfies all of the requirements of the Act, and the claim is therefore compensable.

It is hereby ordered that the sum of $20,000.00 be, and is hereby awarded to Linda J. Caisse, as wife and beneficiary of the deceased police officer, William 0.

Caisse.

Official volume 33 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1980 – July 1, 1979–June 30, 1980)  ·  All opinions in this volume  ·  Also on CourtListener

This text is OCR/derived from the official volume and may contain errors. The PDF is authoritative. Boundary pages shared with the adjacent opinion are reproduced whole, so the page image may show a neighbor's opening or closing lines; the transcript text itself is opinion-scoped. See About & sources.