Spellman & Company v. State of Illinois — 8 Ill. Ct. Cl. 721

SPELLMAN & COMPANY, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Spellman & Company claimed $49.00 for roofing materials furnished to the Lincoln State School and Colony Farm. The court awarded the amount because the supplies were received and the bill was not paid due to a lapse of the appropriation, consistent with prior holdings.

Claim type: Lapsed Appropriation

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

Headnotes

SUPPLIES-when award may be made for. The facts in this case are almost identical with those in Armour & Company vs. State, No. 2520, ante, and the opinion in that case is applicable herein.

SPELLMAN & COMPANY, pro se. OTTO KERNER, Attorney General; JOHN KASSERMAN, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. JUSTICE LINSCOTT delivered the opinion of the court:

This was a claim filed by Spellman & Company for 28 squares of 2-ply roll roofing at $1.75 per square, furnished at the request of proper authorities of the Lincoln State School and Colony Farm at Lincoln, Illinois. This material was furnished January 23, 1933, and the entire bill amounts to the sum of $49.00. The bill was sent to the Institution and no action taken thereon.

In a report dated August 7, 1934, from John C. Weigel, Fiscal Supervisor, it is stated: "The original contractor that put up these buildings refused to make certain repairs in January, 1933, and to prevent water coming into the buildings, the institution ordered Spellman & Company to furnish 28 squares of two ply roll roofing at $1.75 per square, amounting to $49.00. "The then Chief Clerk, Mr. Wertheim, apparently 'lost' this bill and the institution did not follow it up until the 57th biennial appropriation had lapsed."

The facts are undisputed and the State Institution did receive the supplies ordered by it. The bill was not presented for payment before the lapse of the appropriation out of which it could have been paid. We have frequently held under such circumstances that an award should be made, and the Attorney General states he has no objection to the payment of this claim.

An award, therefore, in the sum of $49.00 is made in favor of the claimant. -46 [*722] TAYLOR v. STATE OF ILLINOIS.