Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Fred A. Preisel, Treasurer of Kankakee County v. State of Illinois

12 Ill. Ct. Cl. 320 Illinois Court of Claims Filed November 10, 1942. No. 3566
Disposition: (No. 3566-Claimant awarded $58.80.) Award: $58.80
Cite as: Fred A. Preisel, Treasurer of Kankakee County v. State of Illinois, 12 Ill. Ct. Cl. 320 (1942)
Legacy General 12 awarded 1940s Fred A. Preisel, Treasurer of Kankakee County v. State of Illinois 12 Ill. Ct. Cl. 320 November 10, 1942. (No. 3566-Claimant awarded $58.80.) /opinions/v12-p0337-1/

‘TREASURER OF I~ANXAKEE FRED $. PREISEL, COUNTY, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

The claimant sought a refund of $58.80 in fines mistakenly remitted to the State. The court found the remittance was made by mistake and awarded the full amount to the county treasurer for the use of the county.

Claim type: Unjust Enrichment Refund

Statutes cited: Chapter 53, Section 19 of the Illinois Revised Statutes

Cases cited: Stempel vs. Thomas, 89 Ill. 146; Wolf vs. Beaird, 123 Ill. 585; Blomstrom vs. Dux, 175 Ill. 435-439; Jerzson vs. Mutirq, 256 Ill. App. 514

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

Headnotes

  1. MISTAKE OF FAcT-moneys paid under- award m a y be made f o r refund. Where i t clearly appears that money for which claim is made, was paid to State as the result of a mutual mistake of fact, and is the property of claim. ant, an award for refund of same may be made.
  2. CHIEF, JUSTICE DAMRON

Fred A. Preisel, Treasurer of Kankakee County, claimant herein seeks‘an award for a refund in the sum of $58.80.

On July 10, 1939 one Sylvester SanFrantillo entered a plea of guilty in the city of Kankakee before Edward J. Hoennicke, police magistrate, on a charge of disorderly conduct and assault and battery; upon said plea he was fined a $60.00 and costs which he paid. This money was in turn paid [*321] to the county treasurer and by-him remitted to the State Treasurer by virtue of Chapter 53, Section 19 of the Illinois Revised Statutes. This section provides in substance that all fees, fines, forfeitures and penalties collected by the State’s Attorneys for violations on State highways within the several counties must be remitted to the State Treasurer.

The stipulation in this case entered into by the claimant and respondent agreesthat the report made by the Treasurer of the State of Illinois under date of January 3, 1941 and the various exhibits attached thereto shall constitute the record in this case. The report of the State Treasurer shows conclusively that the remittance was made to respondent by mistake.

It further shows that the county treasurer of Kankakee County requested a refund on August 18, 1939, but was advised by the State Treasurer that he was unable to comply with his request and suggested that a claim be filed in this court.

From the record it is evident that respondent was not entitled to this money and it was an error on the part of the treasurer of Kankakee County to remit same to respondent.

The law with reference to payments made under a mistake of fact is set forth in 21 R. C. L. 164, See. 191.

To the same effect see 48 Corpus Juris 759, See. 318, and annotation in 87 A. L. R. 649; also Stempel vs. Thomas, 89 Ill. 146 ; Wolf vs. Beaird, 123 Ill. 585 ; Blomstrom-vs. Dux;,175 111. 435-439; Jerzs0.n vs. Mutirq, 256 Ill. App. 514.

An award is therefore entered in favor of claimant, Fred A. Preisel, as county treasurer of Kankakee County, Illinois, or hiw successor in office for the use of the cbunty of Kankakee, Illinois, in the sum of $58.80 which represents the amount of fine remitted to the respondent, less collection fees retained by said claimant.

Official volume 12 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion between: July 1, 1941–June 30, 1943)  ·  All opinions in this volume  ·  Also on CourtListener

This text is OCR/derived from the official volume and may contain errors. The PDF is authoritative. Boundary pages shared with the adjacent opinion are reproduced whole, so the page image may show a neighbor's opening or closing lines; the transcript text itself is opinion-scoped. See About & sources.