LITTLE CITY FOUNDATION, Claimant, v . ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant sought to recover under a purchase of service contract with the Department of Children and Family Services, which included an addendum allowing rate changes pursuant to rate appeals. The court granted summary judgment for claimant, finding the rate increase binding and awarding $26,985.40.
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- CoNmcrs-service contract with DCFS-provision for rate changes
LITTLE CITY FOUNDATION, Claimant, v . ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT
OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,Respondent.
Order granting summary judgment filed July 2,1984.
JOHN GEORGE, for Claimant.
NEIL F. HARTIGAN, Attorney General (KATHLEEN O’BRIEN,Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.
CoNmcrs-service contract with DCFS-provision for rate changes was binding-award granted. Summary judgment was granted for Claimant in its action to recover under a contract for provision of services to the Department of Children and Family Services containing an addendum allowing changes in rates pursuant to rate appeals, since Claimant performed all the terms and obligations under the contract, the State failed to show any genuine issue of material fact between the parties, and the clause providing for rate increases was binding.
HOLDERMAN,
J
This matter is before this Court on the motion of , Claimant, Little City Foundation, for summary judgment in its favor and against the Respondent, Illinois Department of Children & Family Services, all parties [*195] represented by counsel, and the Court being fully advised in the premises,
This Court finds that: ~
1. On or about June 30, 1980, Claimant and Respondent entered into a valid and binding “Purchase I of Service Contract” to be effective July 1, 1980, and terminate June 30, 1981.
2. Attached to and a part of the contract was a valid and binding “Contract Addendum” which in its pertinent part provided: “2. The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services and the Contractor will abide by the conditions of any changes in rate made by D.M.H.D.D.pursuant to granted rate appeals.”
3. Claimant has fully performed all terms and obligations under said contract.
4. The Illinois Department of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities, on September 25, 1981, granted the Claimant a rate increase of $2.60 ( 6 . B ) increase over the current rate being given to the Claimant.
5. The rate increase granted on September 25,1981, was binding upon the Claimant and Respondent pursuant to the contract entered into on or about June 30, 1980.
6. The rate increase of $2.60 awarded by the Illinois Department of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities, when multiplied by the number of children being serviced under the contract between the Claimant and Respondent, and that figure multiplied by 365 days in fiscal year 1981, shows that there is a total due Claimant from Respondent pursuant to the contract of
- $26,985.40 after allowing all just credits.
[*196] 7. Respondent has failed to show any genuine issue of material fact existing between the Claimant and the Respondent.
8. Claimant is entitled to summary judgment in its favor under law.
It is hereby ordered that:
1. Claimant's motion for summary judgment in its favor and against the Respondent is granted.
2. Judgment is entered for the Claimant and against the Respondent in the amount of $26,985.40.