GORDON L. WETHERHOLT, Claimant v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant sought $136.98 for damage to his garage caused by a State truck driver's negligence. The court denied the claim, holding that the State is immune from liability for negligence of its employees while performing governmental functions.
Cases cited: Chambler vs. State, 6 C. C. R. 138; Stoddard et al. vs. State, 6 C. C. R. 27; Bucholz et al. vs. State, 7 C. C. R. 241; Hollenbeck vs. County of Winnebago, 95 Ill. 148; City of Chicago vs. Williams, 182 Ill. 135; Minear vs. State Board of Agriculture, 259 Ill. 549; Morrissey vs. State, 2 C. C. R. 254; Tuttle vs. State, 5 C. C. R. 3; Peterson vs. State, 6 C. C. R. 77
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- PROPERTY DAMAGE-negligence of State employee causing-respondent superior not applicable to State. The State is not liable for damages to property caused by the negligent and careless operation of one of its trucks by its employee, the doctrine of respondent superior not being applicable to the State.
During the month of March, 1932, claimant was conducting a garage known as The Ideal Service Station and Garage at Pontiac, Illinois, in which garage the State stored a number of its trucks. On March 21, 1932 the driver of one of the State trucks carelessly and negligently operated such truck in driving the same into the garage, whereby the building was damaged to the extent of One Hundred Thirty-six Dollars and Ninety-eight Cents ($136.98), and claimant has filed herein his claim for such amount. The Attorney General has filed a motion to dismiss for the reason that under the facts set forth in the complaint there is no liability on the part of the State. Claimant bases his right to recover upon the negligence of the servant and agent of the State in the operation of said State truck.
It is well settled by the decisions of this court that in the maintenance of its hard-surfaced roads the State is acting in a governmental capacity. (Chambler vs. State, 6 C. C. R. 138; Stoddard et al. vs. State, 6 C. C. R. 27; Bucholz et al. vs. State, 7 C. C. R. 241.)
It is also the well-settled law of this State that the State is not liable for the negligence of its servants and agents while in the exercise of its governmental functions. (Hollenbeck vs. County of Winnebago, 95 Ill. 148; City of Chicago vs. Williams, 182 Ill. 135; Minear vs. State Board of Agriculture, 259 Ill. 549; Morrissey vs. State, 2 C. C. R. 254; Tuttle vs. State, 5 C. C. R. 3; Peterson vs. State, 6 C. C. R. 77.) [pdf p. 91]
THE YELTON-WEAVER SUPPLY COMPANY v. 101 STATE OF ILLINOIS.
If the claimant has sustained injuries as the result of the negligence of the servant of the State, the right of action is against the servant individually and not against the State.
Claim denied.
Case dismissed.