ROY HARPER, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought workmen's compensation for an injury sustained in 1948 while employed at the Training School for Boys. The court dismissed the claim for lack of jurisdiction because it was filed too late under both the Workmen's Compensation Act and the Court of Claims Act.

Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence

Statutes cited: Section 24 of the Workmen's Compensation Act; Section 22 of the present Court of Claims Act

Cases cited: Hexdall v. State, No. 4245, opinion filed April 18, 1950

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

Headnotes

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT-when an award will be denied under. Where claimant was injured as a result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by respondent at the Training School for Boys, St. Charles, Illinois, operated by the Department of Public Welfare, Court held that claimant filed his case too late, and thus the claim was barred by Section 24 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, and also barred by Section 22 of the Court of Claims Act.

LATHROP J. HUNT, Attorney for Claimant. IVAN A. ELLIOTT, Attorney General; C. ARTHUR NEBEL, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

LANSDEN, J.

On August 12, 1950, claimant, Roy Harper, filed his complaint, alleging that on March 18, 1948 he was injured as a result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by respondent at the Training School for Boys, St. Charles, Illinois, operated by the Department of Public Welfare.

Seeking to recover under the Workmen's Compensation Act, claimant further alleged that he was paid no compensation, but that medical, surgical and hospital services were furnished by respondent.

Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss, asserting that this Court is without jurisdiction of claimant's case.

It is manifest that claimant's complaint is filed too late, and that this Court has no jurisdiction of his case.

Not only is claimant barred by Section 24 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, but he is also barred by Section 22 of the present Court of Claims Act.

Upon the authority of Hexdall v. State, No. 4245, opinion filed April 18, 1950, wherein the same question was decided, thoroughly discussed, and previous decisions of this Court collected, the motion of respondent to dismiss must be and is hereby sustained.

Case dismissed.