Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Federal Match Corp. v. State of Illinois

5 Ill. Ct. Cl. 263 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1927-01-19 No. 1024
Disposition: (No. 1024-Claimant awarded $393.72.) Award: $393.72 Agency: Secretary of State
Cite as: Federal Match Corp. v. State of Illinois, 5 Ill. Ct. Cl. 263 (1927)
Legacy General 5 awarded 1920s Federal Match Corp. v. State of Illinois 5 Ill. Ct. Cl. 263 1927-01-19 (No. 1024-Claimant awarded $393.72.) /opinions/v05-p0283-1/

FEDERAL MATCH CORPORATION, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

The claimant sought a refund of $393.72 in franchise tax erroneously paid to the Secretary of State. The court overruled the State's demurrer and awarded the claimant the full amount, as the State admitted the overpayment and consented to the award.

Claim type: Tax Refund

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

Headnotes

  1. FRANCHISE TAX-claimant entitled to refund when. There being no dis- OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK E. EAGLE-

This is a claim of the Federal Match Corporation for a refund of $393.72 franchise tax erroneously paid to the Secretary of State for the period beginning July 1, 1925, and ending June 30, 1926, in excess of the amount legally due under the provisions of the General Corporation Act.

The Attorney General first filed a demurrer on behalf of the State, and afterwards filed a statement, attached to which is a copy of a letter from the Secretary of State, admitting claimant is entitled to a refund of $393.72, and the Attorney General consents to an award in favor of claimant for that amount.

As the State was overpaid that amount, the demurrer will be overruled and claimant awarded the sum of $393.72.

Official volume 5 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed between July 1, 1923–June 30, 1927)  ·  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.