Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Raymon a . Oberlander v. State of Illinois

27 Ill. Ct. Cl. 416 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1972-05-09 No. 6371
Disposition: (No. 6371-CIaim:1nt :civ:irtltd $70.16.) I Award: $70.16 Agency: Department of Financial Institutions
Cite as: Raymon a . Oberlander v. State of Illinois, 27 Ill. Ct. Cl. 416 (1972)
Legacy General 27 awarded 1970s Raymon a . Oberlander v. State of Illinois 27 Ill. Ct. Cl. 416 1972-05-09 (No. 6371-CIaim:1nt :civ:irtltd $70.16.) I /opinions/v27-p0431-1/

RAYMON A . OBERLANDER, Claimant, os. STATE OF [LLINoIs, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, Respondent. i Opinion f i l c d M u y 9, 1972

Case summary

Claimant sought $70.16 for a claim that should have been paid from a lapsed appropriation. The court awarded the amount due.

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

  1. CoNTRAcrs-hpsed appropriation. When the appropriation from which ii

( No . 6418-Claiiiiant a\\wdrd 9238.78.) CONTINENTAL OIL C OMPANY, Claimant, us. STATE OF I LLINOIS,

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION, Respondent.

Opinioic filcd MU!/ 9, 1972

CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY, Claimant, pro se.

W ILLIAM J. SCOTT, Attorney General; WILLIAM E. WEBBER, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

(No. M59-Clainiatit awartled $500.21.) BARNES HOSPITAL, Claimant, vs. STATE OF ILLINOIS, DEPARTMENT

OF CHILDREN AND F AMILY SERVICES, Respondent.

Opinion filed h40y 9, 1972.

BARNES HOSPITAL, Claimant, pro se.

WILLIAM J. SCOTT, Attorney General; W ILLIAM E. WEBBER, Assistant Attorney General, for Kespondent.

[*417] CONTRACTS-lapsed appropriation. When the appropriation from which a claim should have been paid has lapsed, the Court will enter an award for the amount due claimant.

PERLIN, C.J.

Official volume 27 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion between: July 1, 1969–June 30, 1972)  ·  All opinions in this volume  ·  Also on CourtListener

This text is OCR/derived from the official volume and may contain errors. The PDF is authoritative. Boundary pages shared with the adjacent opinion are reproduced whole, so the page image may show a neighbor's opening or closing lines; the transcript text itself is opinion-scoped. See About & sources.