Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

O. W. Hunkle & Company v. State of Illinois

4 Ill. Ct. Cl. 15 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1918-11-20
Disposition: awarded Award: $43.89 Agency: State Grain Inspection Department
Cite as: O. W. Hunkle & Company v. State of Illinois, 4 Ill. Ct. Cl. 15 (1918)
Legacy General 4 awarded 1910s O. W. Hunkle & Company v. State of Illinois 4 Ill. Ct. Cl. 15 1918-11-20 awarded /opinions/v04-p0031-1/

O. W. HUNKLE & COMPANY, ACORPORATION v. STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Case summary

Claimant sought payment for earned premiums on cancelled fidelity bonds provided to state employees. The court allowed the claim, awarding $43.89.

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. CANCELLATION OF INDEMNITY BONDS-entitled to allowance for earned

O. W. HUNKLE & COMPANY, A CORPORATION v.

STATE OF ILLINOIS.

Opinion filed November 20, 1918.

CANCELLATION OF INDEMNITY BONDS-entitled to allowance for earned premiums. Where bonds furnished by claimant for State employees are cancelled, the State is liable for the amount of earned premiums on indemnity bonds.

Edward J. Brundage, Attorney General, for State The claimant, at the request of the State of Illinois, requested claimant to furnish Fidelity Bonds to cover certain employees in the State Grain Inspection Department, named in the declaration, which it did.

The proper charges for services are particularly itemized with the numbers of the policies and premiums due for each, showing a total amount of earned premiums by cancellation to be forty-three dollars and eighty-nine cents ($43.89), due from defendant to claimant.

The declaration is properly verified and in due form, and supported by the evidence, all of which the State admits to be true.

The claim is allowed and claimant awarded the sum of forty-three dollars and eighty-nine cents ($43.89).

Official volume 4 (Compiled and Reported by the Authority of the State of Illinois 1923)  ·  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.