Editor’s comment: You may have read last week’s article about an appellate court ruling in the case of Rose v. The Board of Trustees of the Mount Prospect Police Pension Fund, No. 1-10-2157 (September 15, 2011). When we published the article, the writer and your editor weren’t immediately aware our office represented Officer Rose's employer, the Village of Mt. Prospect, in the companion workers' compensation claim. Having published the article, your editor learned of our handling and we note the companion work comp claim was based upon the same set of facts that gave rise to the line-of-duty disability pension claim.
In the memorable words of Justice Brandeis as quoted by venerable opposing counsel in the WC claim, “sunshine is the best disinfectant.” Full disclosure has to be more than an afterthought. Both the author of the article and your editor intended to state our reasoned legal opinions about a reported decision, even though such views may be potentially controversial. As our firm and/or our client have a direct interest in the outcome of the case, disclosure of that interest to our readers is appropriate.
We assure all of our readers it was only our intention to report the news about an important appellate ruling and not to influence the fairness of the companion proceeding or the hearing officer currently handling it. If you have thoughts or comments, please reply or post them on our blog.