Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Tucker v. State of Illinois

6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 190 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1929-03-28 No. 865
Disposition: (No. 865-Claimant awarded $1,500.00.) Award: $1,500.00
Cite as: Tucker v. State of Illinois, 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 190 (1929)
Legacy General 6 awarded 1920s Tucker v. State of Illinois 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 190 1929-03-28 (No. 865-Claimant awarded $1,500.00.) /opinions/v06-p0211-1/

CHARLES TUCKER, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, a teamster employed by the State, was injured when dirt was dumped on his neck and back while hauling dirt on State Hard Road No. 36. The court found he was injured in the course of employment and awarded $1,500.00, the amount recommended by the Attorney General.

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. PERSONAL INJURY-when award will be made. Where it appears that OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE- AND SAVINGS BANK, GUARDIAN OF THE ESTATE OF ALLEN WIL-

This is a claim for total disability. It appears that claimant received his injury while in the employ of the State of Illinois. He was engaged in hauling dirt on State Hard Road No. 36. He was hauling dirt from an excavator operated by the State and while driving up he drove his team into a bank and before he could swing them into place the dirt intended for his load, was dumped upon his neck and back disabling claimant. It appears that claimant had two children under the age of 16 at the time of the injury and was receiving $7.00 per day wages, $2.00 for the team and $5.00 for his personal services as teamster.

It appears further that claimant was bedfast for a long period of time and that he is disabled on account of the injury [*191] to his shoulder and that he is permanently, partially disabled.

The Attorney General comes and sets up that "if the court saw fit to allow any amount in this cause that Fifteen Hundred ($1,500.00) Dollars would be the proper amount."

The court is of the opinion that the claimant was injured in the course of his employment and that the record in this case indicates a damage to claimant of at least $1,500.00.

Therefore this court recommends that this claimant be allowed the sum of Fifteen Hundred ($1,500.00) Dollars.

(Claims dismissed.)

H. LEET PARSONS, 865; EDWARD ABERT, 890; MRS. JAMES O'BRIEN, 914; JAMES LEDWITH, SUSAN LEDWITH AND CLEMENT LEDWITH, 932; RICHARD HOYT MOORE, 940; WM. DONALDSON, 941; J. J. HILL, 942; CLARA STILL, 949; JOSEPH BIBO, 950; MARTHA HOEFT, 951; JAMES M. LANGSTON, 952; BEN F. BOWLBY, 954; CHICAGO POULTRY BREEDERS ASS'N., A CORPORATION, 894; JULIUS M. SHREVE, 1223; CATHERINE HOFREITER, 955; JOHN BIBO, JULIA BIBO AND ANNA BIBO, 992; Z. KERLEY, 1016; FOREMAN TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK, GUARDIAN OF THE ESTATE OF ALLEN WILLIAMS, A MINOR, 1038; WILLIAM E. STILLWELL, 1047; JAMES WARREN LYTLE, 1059; E. W. ELLIS, 1073; ROY H. BROWNING, 1074; WM. CARTER, 1120; J. A. STUBBLEFIELD, 1202; JOSEPH D. MEANS, 1229; GLENSON MYERS, 1252; CLARENCE C. COX AND MINNIE J. COX, 1291; O. Q. FORNHALS, ET AL., 1336; RAY M. HAMILTON, 1399; DAVID R. MITCHELL, 1315; WILLIAM C. CARTER, 1366; FLORENCE REIDAR, 1401, Claimants, vs. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Opinion filed April 25, 1929.

DISMISSAL-when case will be dismissed. Where upon motion of the Attorney General to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for want of prosecution and it appearing that proper notice has been given and no appearance or response to such notice appears upon the record, Held, claimants are in default and cases dismissed for want of prosecution.

OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLETON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM: The above entitled cases come before the court at this time upon the motion of the Attorney General to show cause why the cases should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. [*192]

It appears that notice has been given to all of the claimants in the above entitled cases. Since no appearance or response appears upon the record from any of the above named claimants, the court is of the opinion that they are in default.

Therefore, it is the order of the court that each and all of the above entitled cases are hereby dismissed for want of prosecution.

Official volume 6 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed between July 1, 1927–June 30, 1931)  ·  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.