Angelo Bastone v. State of Illinois

This matter coming to be heard on the joint stipulation of the parties, and the Court being fully advised in the premises; [*134]

I

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: I

1. That claimant shall be awarded the sum of $6,927.07 i i in full satisfaction of all claims against the State of Illinois resulting from his suspension from the Illinois State Police; 2. That claimant is herewith authorized to pay into the , Illinois State Retirement System an amount equal to 8%of the back salary he would have received had he worked , from the date of July 3, 1962, through February 4, 1970; 3. That the Illinois State Retirement System shall accept said payment, and apply it retroactively, so that, when claimant becomes eligible for a pension, he will recei\.e that aiiioiint to \vhich he \voiild ha\^ been entitled had he been actiially \\.orking froin Februarj. 5, 19311. through Febriiarj. 3, 1970.

(So..3936-Clairnant awarded 55.215.80.)

J . DVORAK, EDWIN SR.,Claimant, 17s. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Opinion filed Fehrriary 18. 1971.

R ICHARD F. MCPARTLIN, Attorney for Claimant. \I'ILLIAMJ . SCOTT, Attorney General. , ILLINOIS STATE PoLIcE-hck pay. \\.here stipulated by chinrant and respondent, claimant shall be awarded back pay for period claimant \vas rintlc~r suspension.

ILLINOIS STATE PoLicE-retirement system. \\'here stipulated by claiiirant and respondent, the Illinois State Retirement System shall accept an arnoiint eqrial to 8%of claimant's back pay, and make his benefits retroacti1.e.

PERLIN, C.J. This matter coming to be heard on the joint stipulation of the parties, and the Court being fully advised in the premises; [*135]

135 I

I

,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: ~

I

1. That claimant shall be awarded the sum of $5,215.80 I in full satisfaction of all claims against the State of Illinois resulting from his suspension from the Illinois State Police; 2. That claimant is herewith authorized to pay into the Illinois State Retirement System an amount equal to 8%of the back salary he would have received had he worked from the date of July 3, 1962, through April 2A, 1967; 3. That the Illinois State Retirement System shall accept said payment, and retroactively award claimant a pension commensurate with the amount of his total payment into the retirement fund.

( So . 5412-Claimant awarded $4,000.00.)

J R . , A Minor, by LILLIAN DIVIS, WILLIAM A. DIVIS, His Mother and Next Friend, Claimant, vs. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Opinion filed December 18, 1969.

Claimant's motion to reconsider issue of damages denied April 13, 1971.

COONEY AND STENN, Attorneys for Claimant.

WILLIAM G. C LARK, Attorney General; ETTA J . COLE, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

STATE PARKS, F AIR G ROUNDS , \IEMORIALS AND INSTITUTlONS-dClfy f 0 fflUilltoin. State owes a duty to public to exercise reasonable care in establishing, maintaining and supervising its parks.

STATE PARKS, F AIR G ROUNDS , x'f ESIORIALS AXD INSTITUTIONS-eet;i-d'erlcc.

Where State knew slide \vas broken, but failed to remove it or repair it, it \vas negligent, and its negligence \vas the proximate cause of claimant's injur!..

J. BOOKWALTER, This is a claim for personal injuries sustained on July 3, 1966, as a result of a fall by claimant from a partially dismantled slide located at a play area in the Illinois State Park, Marseilles, Illinois.

[*136] Claimant alleges that respondent was negligent in maintaining the premises of the Illinois State Park in a dangerous condition, and more specifically that respondent was negligent in allowing the slide to remain on the premiws in a defective condition without either giving warning of the condition or repairing or replacing the slidc.

From the testimony and the departnwntal report it may be seen that the slide in question was of the typical variety of slides, but that the portion, which children use to slide down, had been removed, leaving only the ladder and supporting poles standing.

The ranger at the Park, Mr. Gknn K. Hott, had put a chain with a “closed” sign across the ladder, but this had been removed by someone other than park officials, and thrown in a trash can sometime prior to July 3, 1966.

Claimant’s first witness was Mr. Raymond Mills. Mr.

Mills testified that he was a frequent camper at the Illinois State Park in Marseilles, Illinois; that he was present on July 3, 1966, the date of the accident, and that he had observed that the slide portion of the slide was missing. He further testified that the slide portion had been missing for a period of at least two years prior to July 3, 1966, and that he had frequently seen children playing on the ladder and poles, which remained. Mrs. Shirley Jean Mills, wife-of Raymond Mills, testified that she had seen the slide I in/its-defective condition during the summer of 1965,kd tiat it was in this same dismantled condition on the date of the accident.

Mr. William Albert Divis, father of claimant, testified that, on July 3,1966, he and his wife and their three children were camping in the park, and that they had paid the required fee for admission into the park. He testified that his son, then age 5, climbed to the top of the ladder, and started to come down by hanging onto one of the rungs, but that his hand slipped, and he fell sideways, landing on his right side.

[*137] Immediately following the fall, claimant was taken to Rayburn Hospital in Ottawa, Illinois, where his injury was diagnosed as a dislocation of the right elbow with comminuted supra-condylar fracture. He was given general anesthesia, and the fracture was reduced.

It is true that the State is not an insurer of the safety of those using the State’s property, but the State does owe a duty to the public to exercise reasonable care in establishing, inaintaining ant1 siipcv-visingits \):irks. Kntnirr vs.

Stcitc of Illinois, 21 C.C.H. 467; Stecltncin 11s. Strite of lllirrois. 22 C.C.fi.446. In this c;isc’, hotvww-, it is iiiwiinlwiit iil)on claimant to show that respondent had notice of th‘e defective condition of the slide before this duty is placed upon respondent. The fact that the slide was observed in its dangerous condition two years prior to the accident, and the fact that respondent had previously erected a warning sign on the slide, establish that the State had notice, whether implied or actual, of the dangerous condition of the slide.

It is the opinion of this Court that respondent ~ 7 as negligent in allowing the dangerous condition to exist. The duty placed upon the State would require the State in this case to have either removed the remaining portion of the slide or to have erected a barricade or other obstruction, which could not be removed, in order to prevent children from playing on the slide. There is no question that this negligence was the proximate cause of claimant’s injuries.

The remaining question concerns the extent of damages incurred by claimant as a result of this accident.

Claimant’s Exhibits Nos. 1-7, inclusive, admitted without objection, showed medical expenses in the amount of $767.25. Dr. Selig J . Kavka submitted a written report for respondent, which contains the following language: “. . .on extension of the arnis there was a slight outward Ixnving at thr right elbow as cornparcd with the left, incomplete flexion of the elho\v, a i i d lxirc~ly touching the shoiilder with the fingers.

[*138] 1)iagnosis: I’ractiirc. of tlw right iiriii, fro111 history. I i c d v t l . \vitli slight tl(,l‘orniity and i i i i i ) i ~ i r t ) i ( , i it . ” l his Court is of thc opinion that clainiant has siiffcrtd siibstantial d;i~ii;ig~, and is hereby awartletl the siini of $4,000.oo.

(No. s‘3025-( ~ I ~ i i it ~ i i;i\\wdr(l nt $5,546.78.)

E LVA JENNINGS PENWELL,Claiinant, vs. STArk: ov IL,I.INOIS.

Respondent . opitiioit f i k d April 27. 1971.

GOSNEI,L+ HENECKI nnd OUINDHY, Attorncys for C h i i i i - ant.

WILLIAM J . SCOTT, Attorney General; WILLIAM E. WEBER, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

AwARDs-The Court can make awards on a continuing basis when thr claimant continues to have expenses as a result of compensable injury.

PERLIN, C.J .

Claimant filed her petition for reimbursement for monies expended for nursing care and help, medical services and expenses from January 1, 1970, to December 31, 1970, praying for an award in the sum of $5,546.78.

Claimant was seriously injured in an accident on the 2nd day of February 1936, while employed as a Supervisor at the Illinois Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Children’s School at Normal, Illinois. The complete details of this injury can be found in the original cause of action, Penwell vs. State of Illinois, 11 C.C.R. 365, in which an initial award was made, and at which time jurisdiction was retained to make successive awards in the future, and this Court has periodically made supplemental awards to claimant to cover expenses incurred by her, the last award covering the time period from January 1, 1969, through December 31, 1969. .

[*139] I

I

139 I

I

I

I

A joint motion of claimant and respondent was filed herein requesting leave to waive the filing of briefs and arguments. This motion was granted, and no further pleadings have been filed herein.

Since the Attorney General does not contest the veracity nor the propriety of the items and amounts set forth in claimant’s petition, this Court must assume that the Attorney General agrees with the amounts thus set forth.

The Court, therefore, enters an award in favor of the claimant in the sum of $5,546.78 for the period of time from January 1, 1970, through Ileceiuber :31, 1970. ‘I’hc iiiattcr of claimant’s need for additional c;irc is rcwrvcd by this Coiirt for future determina t’Ion.