CLYDE E. STONE, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, a Supreme Court judge, was elected to a new term in 1927, entitling him to a $15,000 annual salary under the Act of June 21, 1923, but the 1925 General Assembly only appropriated $10,000 for that period. The court found the State owed $333.33 for the partial month and awarded that amount.

Claim type: Lapsed Appropriation

Statutes cited: Sec. 83, ch. 53, Smith-Hurd Revised Statutes of 1927; Sec. 6, article 6, Constitution 1870; Sec. 7, art. 6, Const. of 1870; Sec. 18, art. 4, Const. of 1870

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

Headnotes

FEES AND SALARIES-additional salary of Supreme Court Judge-when an OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

FEES AND SALARIES-additional salary of Supreme Court Judge-when an award will be made. Where the statute provides a certain salary for a judge of the Supreme Court and the Legislature fails to make an appropriation for such salary, an award will be made for the difference between the amount appropriated by the General Assembly and the amount provided by Statute. CLYDE E. STONE, pro se. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLETON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the court:

Claimant is one of the judges of the Supreme Court of Illinois. He was elected to succeed himself June 6, 1927. The Act of June 21, 1923, provides: Until the first Monday in June, 1924, the salary of each judge of the Supreme Court shall be ten thousand dollars annually. After the first Monday in June, of the year 1924, the salary of each judge of the Supreme Court who is elected after this Act takes effect, shall be fifteen thousand dollars annually. (Sec. 83, ch. 53, Smith-Hurd Revised Statutes of 1927). Claimant’s term of office as judge of the Supreme Court began on the first Monday in June, 1927. (Sec. 6, article 6, Constitution 1870). By the provisions of the Act of June 21, 1923, his salary is $15,- 000.00 annually after that date. This salary cannot be increased or diminished during the term for which he was elected. (Sec. 7, art. 6, Const. of 1870). It was the duty of the General Assembly of 1925 to make an appropriation for the payment of claimant’s salary at the rate of $15,000.00 from June 6, 1927, to June 30, 1927. (Sec. 18, art. 4, Const. of 1870). The General Assembly of 1925 made an appropriation for the payment of salaries of judges of the Supreme Court [*58] to June 30, 1927, at $10,000.00 per year. By some oversight no appropriation was made for the payment of the increase of salary from June 6, 1927, to June 30, 1927.

Claimant was paid for the month of June, 1927, at the rate of $10,000.00 per year, which left a balance due him of $333.33 for that month. This amount was not paid because no appropriation had been made for its payment by the General Assembly. Under the provisions of section 7 of article 6 of the Constitution and the Act of June 21, 1923, the State owes him that sum.

It is, therefore, ordered that claimant be and he is awarded the sum of $333.33.