NILES SMOTHERS, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought $1,000 for injuries from a bomb explosion at a rifle range, but the court denied the claim because it was based on the same cause of action as a related case and claimant had no right to be on the premises.

Claim type: Personal Injury Negligence

Cases cited: Charles Day vs. State of Illinois, No. 3159

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

Headnotes

ILLINOIS NATIONAL GUARD-organization and maintenance of, governmental function-negligence of officers or members of in leaving explosives exposed to public-personal injuries resulting therefrom-State not liable for. The facts in this case are the same as those in Day vs. State, No. 3159, supra, and the opinion in that case is controlling herein.

EVERETT LEWIS and R. E. SMITH, for claimant. OTTO KERNER, Attorney General; MURRAY F. MILNE, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. JUSTICE LANSCOrr delivered the opinion of the court:

This claim was filed on the 8th day of December, 1937, in the office of the clerk of this court, and sets forth a claim [*293] based on the same alleged cause of action as was stated in the case of Charles Day vs. State of Illinois, No. 3159, with the exception that in this case it was alleged that on the 22nd day of August, 1937, a shell or bomb, the exact and correct name for the same being unknown to the claimant, was picked up from the ground upon, at or near the Rifle Range mentioned in the Day complaint, and given to one, Charles Day, and while the said Charles Day was using due care and caution for his own safety to the best of his knowledge, the said shell or bomb exploded in the hand of said Charles Day, and the claimant, being within a few feet of said Charles Day, and also in the exercise of due care and caution for his own safety, was injured, to the damage of the claimant in the sum of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00).

It was not alleged that Charles Day was an officer or agent of the State of Illinois, or that the claimant had any right to be upon the premises where he was; and what is said by the court in the Day case, applies with equal force in this case.

The motion of the Attorney General, will, therefore, be allowed and the case dismissed.