WILLIAM L. BETZ, Claimant, v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant sought payment for conversion of his personal property by correctional officers. The court denied the claim because no evidence showed that the State or its agents came into possession of the property; it was possible other inmates took it.
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- PRISONERS AND INMAT=-inmate transferred-property lost-no showing State converted property-claim denied. An inmate's claim for the loss of his personal property when he was placed in segregation after an altercation with his cellmate was denied, since the Claimant admitted that the property might have been taken by his cellmate or other inmates, and there was no showing that the State or any of its agents came into possession of the property.
I
Claimant seeks payment for the alleged conversion of his property. , The evidence of the Claimant fails to establish that the Respondent converted his property.
Claimant testified that on August 25, 1982, he was involved in an altercation with his cellmate at the Stateville Correctional Center.
Claimant and his cellmate were placed in segrega' i tion. The cellmate apparently was allowed to leave the I segregation unit, and removed his personal property. 1 Later, Claimant received a few items of his personal property, but claims a loss of various other items.
Claimant admits that it was possible that his cellmate or other inmates took his property.
Since no showing was made that the Respondent or any of its agents come into possession of the property, the Claim will be denied, with prejudice.