Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

The Samaritan Hospital v. State of Illinois

2 Ill. Ct. Cl. 25 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1916-09-28
Disposition: dismissed
Cite as: The Samaritan Hospital v. State of Illinois, 2 Ill. Ct. Cl. 25 (1916)
Legacy General 2 dismissed 1910s The Samaritan Hospital v. State of Illinois 2 Ill. Ct. Cl. 25 1916-09-28 dismissed /opinions/v02-p0055-1/

THE SAMARITAN HOSPITAL v. STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Case summary

The Samaritan Hospital claimed $150 for nursing and treatment of a National Guard member. The claim was dismissed because the claimant failed to file proofs, abstracts, and briefs as required by court rules.

Claim type: Other

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

Headnotes

  1. PRACTICE-rules of-failure to observe. Failure on the part of

THE SAMARITAN HOSPITAL

v.

STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Opinion filed September 28, 1906.

PRACTICE-rules of-failure to observe. Failure on the part of claimant to file proofs, abstracts and briefs, as required by the rules, will support a motion by the Attorney General to dismiss.

Alonzo Hoff, for Claimant.

W. H. Stead, Attorney General, for State.

The claimant, The Samaritan Hospital, filed its claim in this Court on the 20th day of April, 1903.

The claim is for $150.00 for nursing, and treatment of Sergeant Henry Becker, a member of the Illinois National Guard, while recovering from the effects of an injury received during the entertainment of Prince Henry of Prussia, in Chicago, on March 5, 1903.

No proofs, abstracts or arguments, having been filed in this Court by the claimant, the Attorney General, on the 13th day of November, 1905, moved the dismissal of this case for want of prosecution, which motion is therefore allowed and the cause dismissed.

Official volume 2 (Compiled and Reported by the Authority of the State of Illinois 1906–1916)  ·  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.