Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Gould v. State of Illinois

6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 87 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1928-09-11 No. 1289
Disposition: (No. 1289-Claimant awarded $51.27.) Award: $51.27
Cite as: Gould v. State of Illinois, 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 87 (1928)
Legacy General 6 awarded 1920s Gould v. State of Illinois 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 87 1928-09-11 (No. 1289-Claimant awarded $51.27.) /opinions/v06-p0110-1/

HELEN FITCH GOULD, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

The claimant sought reimbursement for expenses incurred by her father, an assistant attorney general of Illinois, during a work trip to Chicago. The court awarded her $51.27 based on the Attorney General's recommendation.

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. FEES AND SALARIES-when award will be made for traveling expenses. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

The declaration in this case shows that claimant is the only child and sole heir at law of Edward Churchill Fitch, who died intestate March 1, 1926; that, at the time of his death and for many years prior thereto, the said Edward Churchill Fitch was an assistant attorney general of the State of Illinois; that in the course of his duties as such assistant attorney general it became necessary for him to go to Chicago on February 15, 1928, where he remained until February 18, 1928, and that the expenses incurred by him in making this trip amounted to the sum of Fifty-one Dollars and Twentyseven Cents. This claim is to reimburse claimant for that amount.

Attached to the declaration are a letter and statement of the Attorney General corroborating the facts as set forth in the declaration and recommending that the claim be allowed.

It is, therefore, ordered by the court that the claimant be allowed an award in the sum of Fifty-one Dollars and Twenty-seven Cents.

Official volume 6 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed between July 1, 1927–June 30, 1931)  ·  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.