Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
General Court of Claims
Download PDF

Lawrence T. Hartman v. State of Illinois

32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 651 Illinois Court of Claims Filed November 6, 1978 No. 76-CC-2952
Disposition: (No. 76-CC-2952-Claim denied.)
Cite as: Lawrence T. Hartman v. State of Illinois, 32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 651 (1978)

LAWRENCE T. HARTMAN, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

On September 15, 1978, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss this cause. This claim is for legal fees by a private attorney hired by the adoptive parents of a child under the jurisdiction of the Department of Children and Family Services. The Department of Children and Family Services agreed prior to the adoption to permit the adoptive parents to choose an attorney of their own choice and agreed to pay fees connected therewith in the amount of $642.90, which amount was paid in full. The $70.00 additional being sought was submitted as a billing two days after the finalization of the adoption. The payment of private counsel is discretionary with the Department of Children and Family Services and any amount agreed to and paid are benefits to which the adoptive parents have no legal right. The Departmental Report submitted by the Department of Children and Family Services denied this claim. Under Rule 14 of the Court of Claims, it appears that Claimant was employed not by the State of Illinois but by the adoptive parents and, consequently, the State is not responsible. Motion to dismiss is granted and this cause dismissed. (No, 76-CC-3116-Claimant awarded $35,265.00.) CANNAL RANDOLPH CORPORATION, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent. H. BuRTON ScHATz, Attorney for Claimant.

LAWRENCE T. HARTMAN, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Order filed November 6, 1978.

On September 15, 1978, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss this cause.

This claim is for legal fees by a private attorney hired by the adoptive parents of a child under the jurisdiction of the Department of Children and Family Services.

The Department of Children and Family Services agreed prior to the adoption to permit the adoptive parents to choose an attorney of their own choice and agreed to pay fees connected therewith in the amount of $642.90, which amount was paid in full.

The $70.00 additional being sought was submitted as a billing two days after the finalization of the adoption.

The payment of private counsel is discretionary with the Department of Children and Family Services and any amount agreed to and paid are benefits to which the adoptive parents have no legal right.

[*652] The Departmental Report submitted by the Department of Children and Family Services denied this claim.

Under Rule 14 of the Court of Claims, it appears that Claimant was employed not by the State of Illinois but by the adoptive parents and, consequently, the State is not responsible.

Motion to dismiss is granted and this cause dismissed.

(No, 76-CC-3116-Claimant awarded $35,265.00.)

CANNAL RANDOLPH CORPORATION, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Opinion filed October 25, 1978.

H. BuRTON ScHATz, Attorney for Claimant.

WILLIAM J. Scott, Attorney General; PAuL M. SENGPIEHL, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Contracts-Breach of lease agreement.

This claim comes on to be heard on the joint stipulation of the parties.

Claimant, Canal Randolph Corporation, seeks to recover $118,272.25 in damages allegedly resulting from the excessive use of certain realty by the State of Illinois, Department of Labor during the lease period May, 1972, through May, 1975. The parties agree that the lease in question contemplated that the Illinois Department of Labor would utilize Claimant’s building during normal business hours, but that Respondent’s use of the building greatly exceeded that expectation.

[*653] PRerceetrertroector. koro In Canal Randolph Corporation v. State of Illinois, 31 Ill.Ct.Cl. 88, the identical parties and issues were before the Court. The Court there ruled that an ambiguity in the lease here in question favored the Claimant landlord, and therefore entered an award of $10,- 215.00 to Claimant based upon 681 hours of excessive use at $15.00 per hour. 11) This Court has reviewed the settlement negotiations that have transpired between the Illinois Department of Labor and Claimant, based upon the Court’s opinion in 31 JIl.Ct.Cl. 88. The Court feels that the agreed upon settlement in the amount of $26,040.00 for excessive use of the building is reasonable, and is hereby approved.

The Court further finds that the State breached the lease in failing to provide proper maintenance services and that the Claimant expended the sum of $9,225.00 to provide those services which were the responsibility of Respondent under the contract.

It is therefore ordered that Claimant be, and hereby is, awarded the sum of $35,265.00, in full satisfaction if its claim against the State of Illinois.

Official volume 32 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1978 – July 1, 1977–June 30, 1978; Fiscal Year 1979 – July 1, 1978 – June 30, 1979)  ·  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.