Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
General Court of Claims
Download PDF

United States Department of Labor v. State of Illinois

34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 188 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1980-08-25 No. 79-CC-0568
Disposition: (No. 79-CC-0568-Claimant awarded $99,531.00.) Award: $99,531.00 Agency: Illinois Industrial Commission
Cite as: United States Department of Labor v. State of Illinois, 34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 188 (1980)
General Court of Claims 34 awarded 1980s United States Department of Labor v. State of Illinois 34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 188 1980-08-25 (No. 79-CC-0568-Claimant awarded $99,531.00.) /opinions/v34-p0288-1/

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, Claimant, u. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

The claimant sought recoupment of grant funds misspent by the Illinois Industrial Commission. The court awarded $99,531.00 based on the parties' stipulation and the Commission's admission of liability.

Claim type: Contract

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

Headnotes

  1. TYRONE C. FAHNER, Attorney General (FRANCIS M. DONOVAN, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.
  2. CONTRAcTS-StipUhtiOn of parties provided basis for award for breach o f contract. The Industrial Commission expended certain funds granted to it by the United States Department of Labor and a stipulation of the parties as to the amount of damages arising from Commission’s expenditures which were inconsistent with the conditions of the grants was the basis for an award in favor of the Department of Labor.

The Claimant seeks an award of $110,726.00, pursuant to its First Amended Complaint, for the recoupment of certain monies furnished to the Illinois Industrial Commission, hereinafter the Commission, under two grants by the Claimant. A 1975 audit conducted on behalf of the Claimant indicated that part of the funds under the grants had been expended in a manner inconsistent with the terms and conditions of the grants in question. The audit revealed that $110,726.00 had been inconsistently expended. After a demand for said sum was made upon the Commission with no action taken thereon this suit was filed.

The Commission has admitted as true all the allegations of the amended complaint in the aforesaid stipulation. Therefore, the court has before it an admission which sets forth a legal basis for an award; to wit, contract and breach of contract.

[*189] Based on the existence of facts setting forth a cause of action and liability in contract, the remaining consideration for this court is one of damages.

The audit which uncovered the inconsistencies in the expenditure of grant funds indicated that $110,726.00 may have been misspent. The parties have, however, agreed between themselves that $99,531.00 represents a fair and reasonable compromise of this claim. While this court is not bound by any stipulation between the parties to a lawsuit, especially involving the question of damages, such a stipulation will not be arbitrarily set aside. Absent a showing of bad faith or lack of authority, a compromise reached in arm’s length negotiations will be considered by this court. We concur with the parties that the sum of $99,531.00 is a fair and reasonable figure for the compromise of the instant claim.

It is hereby ordered that the sum of $99,531.00 (ninety nine thousand five hundred thirty one dollars and no cents) be awarded to Claimant, United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, in full and complete satisfaction of any and all claims which are the subject matter of the complaint filed herein.

Official volume 34 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1981 – July 1, 1980–June 30, 1981)  ·  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.