DURANT, Deceased, 981, Claimants, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Re- spondent.

Case summary

The court denied an award and dismissed the case, and later denied a petition for rehearing filed over a year and eight months after the opinion, as untimely under Rule 30. A subsequent motion to vacate and petition for new trial were also 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

DURANT, Deceased, 981, Claimants, vs. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Re- REHEARING-insufficiency of evidence. A rehearing will be denied where EVIDENCE-when award will not be made on grounds of newly discov- RULES-when rehearing will be denied for failure to comply with rules OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLE-

Rehearing denied May 9, 1929. REHEARING-insufficiency of evidence. A rehearing will be denied where newly discovered evidence is not sufficient to justify a finding in favor of claimant had it been in the record when the case was originally considered. EVIDENCE-when award will not be made on grounds of newly discovered evidence. Where an examination of newly discovered evidence shows that an award could not have been made, had the new evidence been before the court at the time the case was originally disposed of an award will not be made. RULES-when rehearing will be denied for failure to comply with rules of the court-Rule 30. Where Rule 30 of the Court of Claims requires a petition for rehearing to be filed within twenty-five days after the opinion is filed and the petition for rehearing is not filed until over a year and eight months after the opinion is filed a rehearing will be denied. WILL N. JOHNSON, for claimant. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; FRANK R. EAGLETON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the court:

An opinion was filed May 12, 1927, denying award in each of these cases and dismissing them. On February 7, 1929, the attorney for claimants filed a petition for a rehearing of each case on the grounds of newly discovered evidence. We have examined the alleged new evidence filed in each case, and [*168] could not have allowed an award in either of them had this evidence been before the court at the time the cases were disposed of. Rule 30 of this court requires all petitions for a rehearing to be filed within 25 days after the opinion has been filed in the case. The petitions for a rehearing in these cases were not filed until over a year and eight months after the opinion was filed. The petition for rehearing is denied in each case.

On May 9, 1929, upon motion to vacate order heretofore entered the following additional opinion was filed: Per Curiam: This cause coming on to be heard on motion of claimant to set aside and vacate the order heretofore filed and petition for new trial, and the court having sufficiently reviewed the matter brought upon said motion and petition and that it appearing that motion and petition should be denied, it is Therefore considered by the court, that the said motion be overruled, and the petition for new trial be denied and the motion is hereby overruled and the petition for new trial is denied.