WALTER GUERTIN, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant sought damages for injuries and wrongful death after his car fell from a highway bridge approach with no railing. The court dismissed the claim because the highway was a county road not under state control.
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- PERSONAL INJURY-HIGHWAYS-JURISDICTION. Where claimant sustains personal injuries and damage to his property, while driving on a highway, alleged to have been caused by negligence in failing to properly maintain same, and said highway is not part of the State system of hard roads and not under the direct supervision of the State, but was under sole ownership, control and supervision of the county, Court of Claims is without jurisdiction to make award and plea to jurisdiction will be sustained and claim dismissed.
The automobile of Walter Guertin, the claimant, was wrecked, the claimant injured and his infant child was drowned on a public highway on the 6th day of April, 1931.
The highway extends south from Beaverville in the County of Iroquois. At a place about two miles and one-half south of Beaverville, a bridge is built over a drainage ditch or creek with a narrow approach leading thereto. While proceeding along this highway, the claimant undertook to pass another automobile as he was on the said approach, which had no protection fence or railing, and in so doing his automobile toppled over a twelve foot embankment causing the injuries and death above mentioned, for which he claims damages in the amount of Eleven Thousand Dollars ($11,000.00).
It is contended by the State in a plea to jurisdiction that the highway in question was not taken over by the State and [*159] was under the sole ownership, control and supervision of the County of Iroquois.
While this unimproved highway is a State Aid Road and connects with State Bond Issue Route 116, this does not bring it within the jurisdiction of this court. It is not a part of the State system of hard roads and therefore not under the direct supervision and control of the State.
From all the facts set forth in this case, it is the opinion of this court that the contention of the respondent is correct, and therefore the plea to jurisdiction is sustained and the claim is dismissed without award.