Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Dr. M. L. Hartman v. State of Illinois

5 Ill. Ct. Cl. 183 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1925-05-01 No. 880
Disposition: (No. 880-Claimant awarded $322.00.) Award: $322.00
Cite as: Dr. M. L. Hartman v. State of Illinois, 5 Ill. Ct. Cl. 183 (1925)
Legacy General 5 awarded 1920s Dr. M. L. Hartman v. State of Illinois 5 Ill. Ct. Cl. 183 1925-05-01 (No. 880-Claimant awarded $322.00.) /opinions/v05-p0203-1/

DR. M. L. HARTMAN, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, a physician, sought payment for medical services rendered to persons injured by an army truck of the Illinois State Militia. The court awarded $322.00, finding the claim just and equitable after investigation.

Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence

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

Headnotes

  1. SERVICES-when State liable. When medical services have been rendered OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

This is a claim for services performed by claimant in caring for A. W. Bruhn, Margaret Bruhn, Caroline Bruhn, Ralph Bruhn and Gladys Bruhn, said persons having been injured by an army truck while in actual service and being used by the Illinois State Militia, near Belvidere, Illinois, and an award having been made to them, in which award, no allowance was made for the services of said physician.

Statement filed by Attorney General of the State of Illinois recites that this claim was forwarded to the adjutant general's office, where it was duly investigated, and that same was found to be just and equitable for amount claimed.

Wherefore, we award claimant the sum of $322.00, being the amount claimed for professional services rendered to said persons.

Official volume 5 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed between July 1, 1923–June 30, 1927)  ·  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.