PRINCE HARRISON, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS,Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought damages for years served in prison allegedly in violation of constitutional rights. The court dismissed the claim, holding that the legislature must expressly create a remedy for this type of claim.

Claim type: Wrongful Imprisonment

Cases cited: James Montgomery v. State, No. 4264

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

Headnotes

JnRIsnIcTIoN-unlawjul incarceration. Following James Montgomery VB. State of Illinois, supra, the Court held that it had no jurisdiction in this case.

JOHN H. SEARING, Attorney for Claimant. IVAN A. ELLIOTT, Attorney General; CHARLES H, EVANS, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

DELANEY, J.

Claimant, Prince Harrison, filed his complaint on July 23, 1951, wherein he alleges damages for the years he was compelled to serve in the Illinois State Penitentiary in violation of his constitutional rights.

On October 24, 1951, respondent filed its motion to strike claimant’s complaint, and dismiss this cause.

Thereafter, claimant filed his motion to strike respondent’s motion to dismiss.

We have held in the case of James Montgomery vs.

State, No. 4264, that for this Court to have jurisdiction of subject matter of this type the Legislature, by express

I

provision, would have to create an act providing for such a remedy.

[*246] The motion of respondent to strike and dismiss this cause is hereby sustained.

Case dismissed.