Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
General Court of Claims
Download PDF

Maurice Pendleton v. State of Illinois

32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 690 Illinois Court of Claims Filed August 28, 1978 No. 77-CC-1414
Disposition: (No. 77-CC-1414-Claimant awarded $50.73.) Award: $50.73
Cite as: Maurice Pendleton v. State of Illinois, 32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 690 (1978)
General Court of Claims 32 awarded 1970s Maurice Pendleton v. State of Illinois 32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 690 August 28, 1978 (No. 77-CC-1414-Claimant awarded $50.73.) /opinions/v32-p0797-1/

MAURICE PENDLETON, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Headnotes

  1. PRISONER AND INMATES-Bailments. State has a duty to exercise rea-

MAURICE PENDLETON, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Opinion filed August 28, 1978.

PRISONER AND INMATES-Bailments. State has a duty to exercise reasonable care to safeguard and return an inmate’s property during the course of the transfer of an inmate between penal institutions.

Potoss@:3:

Claimant, an inmate of the Stateville Correctional Center, has brought this action to recover the value of certain items of personal property which he alleges were lost during the course of its transfer from Stateville Correctional Center to Cook County Jail. These items consisted of a radio, chess set, cigarettes and personal care items valued at $50.73.

That Respondent has filed with the Court a stipulation by Respondent as well as a departmental report indicating that the, “Department of Corrections has no evidence to refute the allegations contained in Claimant’s verified complaint.”

[*691] Claimant’s prima facie case therefore stand unrebutted.

It is therefore ordered, that Claimant be, and hereby is awarded the sum of $50.73.

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.