Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Olsenwindow Cleaning Company v. State of Illinois

26 Ill. Ct. Cl. 48 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1967-01-10 No. 5328
Disposition: (No. 5328-Claimant awarded $333.65.) Award: $333.65 Agency: Division of Highways, Department of Public Works and Buildings
Cite as: Olsenwindow Cleaning Company v. State of Illinois, 26 Ill. Ct. Cl. 48 (1967)
Legacy General 26 awarded 1960s Olsenwindow Cleaning Company v. State of Illinois 26 Ill. Ct. Cl. 48 1967-01-10 (No. 5328-Claimant awarded $333.65.) /opinions/v26-p0089-1/

OLSENWINDOW CLEANING COMPANY, INCORSORATED, Claim- ant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought $333.65 for window cleaning services rendered to the Division of Highways. The court awarded the amount because the appropriation had lapsed due to delayed billing by claimant.

Claim type: Lapsed Appropriation

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

Headnotes

  1. CONTRACTS-1UpSed a p p r o p k t i o n . When the appropriation from which a claim should have been paid has lapsed, the Court will enter an award for the amount due claimant.

Claimant seeks to recover the sum of $333.65 for services rendered to the Division of Highways, Department of Public Works and Buildings, in cleaning windows in the Division Building, which is located at 4051 North Harlem Avenue in the City of Chicago.

A stipulation of facts was made and entered into by and between claimant and respondent, and filed with the Court of Claims on the 1st day’of December, 1966. Said stipulation reads as follows :

“That claimant, Olsen Window Cleaning Go., Inc., had completed the work as alleged in claimant’s statement of claim.

“That there is lawfully due claimant the sum of $333.65.

“That as a result of delay in billing by the claimant herein, payment was not made prior to the closing of the biennium appropriation.

“That claimant continues to be the sole person in[*49]terested in this claim, and that no assignment thereof had occurred.

“That upon the foregoing agreed case filed herein, the Court shall decide thereon and render judgment herein according to the rights of the parties in the same manner as if the facts aforesaid were proved upon the trial of said issue.”

This Court has held that, when the appropriation for the biennium from which a claim should have been paid has lapsed, it will enter an order for the amount due claimant.

Claimant is hereby awarded the sum of $333.65.

Official volume 26 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion between: January 10, 1967–June 20, 1969)  ·  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.