JAMES E. MAHER, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought damages for crop destruction caused by water backing up onto his property due to a bridge embankment. The court found that damages were not established and denied the claim.

Claim type: Property Damage

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

Headnotes

PROPERTY DAMAGE-when no award will be made. Where it appears

PROPERTY DAMAGE-when no award will be made. Where it appears from the evidence that damages have not been established, no award will be made for loss of crops destroyed by water backing up on claimants property by reason of the construction of a bridge. W. W. WRIGHT, for claimant. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; ROY D. JOHNSON, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE CLARITY delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a claim for damages to the property of claimant in the County of Stark and State of Illinois. It is claimed that by reason of the construction of the bridge in question here, the embankment or appronchments lending thereto acted as a dam, thereby causing the water to remain and back up on claimant's property, and by reason of which condition, claimant's crops were destroyed as claimed.

It is the opinion of the court, as urged by the Attorney General, that damages have not been established in the re[*256]view of all the facts and circumstances in this case. It is the opinion of the court that the contention of the Attorney General is correct.

Therefore, it is recommended that the claim be denied.