RAYMOND HEISE, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, an inmate at the State Reformatory, alleged negligence by the State when chlorinated lime splashed into his eye while he was pouring it into a washing machine without protective goggles. The court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the claim, holding that the State is not liable to an inmate injured while confined in a state institution.

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

PERSONAL INJURY-when no award will be made for injuries sustained OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

PERSONAL INJURY-when no award will be made for injuries sustained by an inmate of the State Reformatory-Workmen's Compensation Act. The State is not legally or equitably liable to an inmate who receives an injury while confined in one of its institutions and does not come under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. JOSEPH A. LONDRIGAN, for claimant. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLETON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the court:

The declaration alleges that on the 8th day of April, 1927, claimant, who was then a minor, was confined to the State Reformatory at Pontiac; and that on that date, while he was pouring chlorinated lime into a washing machine, under the orders of the reformatory authorities, the lime splashed into his right eye, resulting in serious injury thereto. The declaration also alleges that claimant was in the exercise of due care and caution, and that the accidental injury was due to the negligence of the State in not providing goggles to the inmates or some method of protection from such injury; that claimant was released from the reformatory on October 15, 1927; that ever since said accident he has suffered great pain, and has been prevented from following any gainful occupation; that he has spent $1,000.00 endeavoring to be cured of said wound, and that he has lost the complete and permanent use of his right eye. He alleges damages in the amount of $10,000.00 and asks for an award against the State.

The Attorney General has filed a general demurrer to claimant's declaration. Claimant's attorney has submitted the case without brief or argument.

Claimant was not an employee of the State at the time of the accident, but was an inmate of a State institution and would not come under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act. This Court has repeatedly held that the State is not legally or equitably liable to an inmate who receives an injury while confined in one of its institutions. [*268]

The demurrer is therefore sustained and the cause dismissed.