ROY 8. VANCIL, Claimant, v. STATEOF ILLI NOI S, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant, a civil service employee, was suspended and discharged for alleged abuse of a patient. The Civil Service Commission found no just cause and ordered reinstatement. The Court of Claims awarded back pay of $1,385.41 for the period of suspension and discharge.
Cases cited: Clay Wilson vs. State of Illinois, 12 Court of Claims 413; Herman Drezner vs. State of Illinois, 15 Court of Claims 16
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEE RESTORED TO POSITION-Where entttled to recover?/ f o r wages while under suspension and a f t e r discharge. Where a civil service employee at the State Hospital a t Anna, Illinois, was suspended for the alleged abuse of a patient, and was subsequently discharged for the same reason, and while a hearing on his discharge was pending before the Civil Service Commission, held himself ready, willing and able to perform his duties, and the Commission found that ‘ he was not discharged for just reason, he is entitled to an award for his salary during the period of his discharge.
The claimant, Roy S. Vancil, a civil service employee [*170] of the Department of Public Welfare of the State of Illinois, was employed at the State Hospital at Anna, Illinois, as an attendant. On October 20th, 1948, under the charge of "alleged to have been abusive to a patient by the name of Milo Garavoglia", claimant was suspended for 30 days until November 20, 1948.
On November 18, 1948 claimant was served with notice of discharge effective November 20, 1948 on the same ground used for his suspension. Claimant requested a hearing by the State Civil Service Commission and on the 25th day of July, 1949, said Commission found that claimant. was not discharged for just cause and ordered that he be immediately reinstated to his certified position of attendant at the Anna State Hospital. In accordance with the order of the Civil Service Commission, claimant returned to service as of July 25, 1949. Claimant's salary at date of suspension was $175.00 a month.
From the record the only deduction that can be made is that claimant had been diligent in the protection of his own rights, and at all times for which he-seeks payment of salary, he was ready, willing and able to perform the duties of his position, tendered performance thereof, and such tender was refused. These facts have to be taken as true as no affirmative defenses were offered to the contrary.
Under the holdings of this Court in Clay Wilson vs.
State of Illinois, 12 Court of Claims 413, and Herman Drezner vs. State of Illinois, 15 Court of Claims 16, the claimant is entitled to an award.
The evidence shows that claimant is entitled to recover the amount set forth in his complaint, being $1,385.41.
An award is therefore entered in favor of the claimant in the sum of $1,385.41.