Background
Joshua Mahan, a Marion police officer, received a line-of-duty disability pension after a 2011 injury affecting his upper back and spine. The pension board previously terminated his benefits twice. The first termination was reversed by the circuit court, and the second was reversed by the Illinois Appellate Court in 2023 as contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.
At a 2024 review hearing, the Board again terminated Mahan’s pension by a 3-2 vote. Mahan presented functional-capacity evaluations finding that he could perform only medium-duty work, while a Marion police officer position was classified as heavy-duty work. The Board instead credited an orthopedic surgeon’s opinion that Mahan had fully recovered and could return to unrestricted police work. Before the hearing, Mahan sought to remove two board members after recorded comments suggested they had prejudged his disability claim.
The Court’s Holding
The appellate court reversed the Board’s decision. It held that terminating Mahan’s pension was against the manifest weight of the evidence. The court found that the Board improperly relied on the physician’s opinion because it characterized Mahan’s original injury as a short-term strain, despite the earlier medical evidence underlying the disability award, and because the opinion did not meaningfully address the applicable Illinois police physical-fitness standards.
The court also held that Mahan was denied due process when Terrance Henry and Tammy Beasley Wright remained on the decision-making panel. Their recorded statements about “winning” the next hearing, Mahan supposedly jogging in or teaching Zumba, and approving retroactive benefits “under protest” showed that disinterested observers could conclude they had prejudged Mahan’s disability. The court suggested their removal from any future hearings involving Mahan.
Key Takeaways
- A police disability pension may be terminated only when the officer has recovered from the disabling condition.
- Medical opinions supporting termination must address the actual injury and relevant physical requirements of police work.
- Administrative decision makers may violate due process when their prior remarks show prejudgment of the claimant or claim.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that pension boards must evaluate continuing disability on a complete and accurate record, rather than rely on a medical opinion that conflicts with the condition initially found disabling. It also underscores that pension-board members must remain objectively impartial, particularly when a prior court ruling requires payment of benefits.