Anton v. State of Illinois — 6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 115

FRANK G. ANTON, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought compensation under the 1921 soldiers' and sailors' act, but his claim was denied by the Illinois Service Recognition Board. The court held it lacked jurisdiction to review the Board's final decision, and the claim was denied.

Claim type: Other

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

Headnotes

SOLDIERS BONUS-jurisdiction of Service Recognition Board. No court COURT OF CLAIMS-when Court of Claims has no jurisdiction. The Court OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

SOLDIERS BONUS-jurisdiction of Service Recognition Board. No court has jurisdiction to review the actions of the Service Recognition Board, or allow claims for compensation which it has passed upon and denied; and its findings are a final adjudication of the matter. COURT OF CLAIMS-when Court of Claims has no jurisdiction. The Court of Claims will not assume jurisdiction where the statute provided an agency of the State to receive and pass upon the merits of all applications for compensation under the Soldiers' Bonus Act. J. E. BRACH, for claimant. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLETON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the court:

Claimant bases his right to an award upon the provisions of the Act of May 8, 1921, providing for the payment of compensation to soldiers and sailors who served in the war with Germany. The Attorney General has filed a general demurrer to claimant's declaration, and claimant has filed a motion to overrule the demurrer and for judgment.

The declaration and the exhibits attached thereto and made a part thereof show that claimant made application to the Illinois Service Recognition Board for compensation under the provisions of that Act, and that his claim was disapproved by that Board July 18, 1925. The declaration also shows that claimant made application for compensation to the Department of Adjusted Compensation of the State of Ohio, and that his claim was disapproved by it also. He now contends that the Illinois Service Recognition Board erroneously disapproved his claim and asks this court to make an award in his favor for $300.00, the amount he alleges is due him under the provisions of the Act.

The Service Recognition Board consisted of the Governor, State Treasurer and Adjutant General. By Section 6 of the Act it is provided, "This board shall have complete charge and control of the general scheme of payments authorized in this Act and may adopt general rules for the making of such payments, the ascertainment and selection of proper beneficiaries and the amount to which such beneficiaries are [*116] entitled, and for procedure. The Service Recognition Board shall adopt general rules for determining the question of whether an applicant was a resident of this State at the time he entered the service; and shall prescribe by rule, the nature of the proof to be submitted to establish the fact of residence."

It is apparent from the provisions of this section that the legislature intended to give the Service Recognition Board full and final jurisdiction of all applications for compensation under that Act. That being true, no court has jurisdiction to review its actions, or to allow claims for compensation which it has passed upon and denied. But it is said by claimant that "this court has power to recognize those claims which the State of Illinois should, 'in equity and good conscience discharge and pay.'" That is true as to claims against the State that have not been passed upon by some other agency of the State. But this court has no appellate jurisdiction. And the Service Recognition Board having heard the evidence of claimant in support of his right to compensation and having found against him its finding is a final adjudication of the matter.

It is urged by claimant that his claim was disapproved by the Service Recognition Board for reasons over which he had no control-for no fault of his. If that be true, he had an opportunity to have the whole matter gone into for the purpose of determining whether or not he was really entitled to the compensation claimed. On November 15, 1927, he was notified that the existence of the Service Recognition Board terminated November 9, 1927. The Legislature recognized that there might be claimants whose claims had been disallowed through no fault of theirs, and passed the Act of July 7, 1927. This Act provides that any person entitled to compensation under the Act of May 3, 1921, "and who in good faith applied for but, through no fault of his own, did not receive such compensation . . . shall be paid the same compensation as that provided for by said cited Act, if such person makes application therefor within one year from the time this Act takes effect. Application for delayed compensation under the provisions of this Act shall be made to the Adjutant General of Illinois." Section 2 of this Act makes it the duty of the Adjutant General "to receive and pass upon the merits of all applications for compensation [*119] have created the position of business manager and the claimant would have received his salary as a matter of course.

They were therefore unable to pay the claimant.

The Attorney General of the State of Illinois has filed a statement in this cause, stating that the facts as set forth in the statement of claimant were correct. Therefore, it is recommended that claimant be allowed the sum of Twentyeight Hundred Dollars ($2,800.00).