Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
Legacy General
Download PDF

Davidson Division v. State of Illinois

26 Ill. Ct. Cl. 136 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1967-05-09 No. 5384
Disposition: (No. 5384-Claimant awarded $200.00.) Award: $200.00 Agency: Office of the Secretary of State
Cite as: Davidson Division v. State of Illinois, 26 Ill. Ct. Cl. 136 (1967)
Legacy General 26 awarded 1960s Davidson Division v. State of Illinois 26 Ill. Ct. Cl. 136 1967-05-09 (No. 5384-Claimant awarded $200.00.) /opinions/v26-p0177-1/

DAVIDSON DIVISION, FAIRCHILD CAMERAND INSTRUMENT CORPORATION, Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS,Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought $200.00 for services and parts furnished to the Office of the Secretary of State. The court found that the contract was properly entered into, services were satisfactorily performed, and funds had lapsed, and awarded $200.00.

Claim type: Contract

Cases cited: St. Mary's Hospital, Decatur, of the Hospital Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, an Illinois Corporation vs. State of Illinois, Case No. 5261, opinion filed February 24, 1966

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

Headnotes

  1. CONTRACTS-hp8ed appropriation. Where contract has been properly entered into, all services satisfactorily performed, proper charges made therefor, adequate funds were available at the time the contract was executed, and the appropriation from which such claim could and would have been paid had lapsed, a n award will be made.

Claimant, Davidson Division, Fairchild Camera and Instrument Corporation, filed its complaint in the Court of Claims on January 26, 1967 in which it seeks the sum of $200.00 for services and parts furnished to the Office of the Secretary of State.

A Departmental Report was filed, which stated in part “The amount of $200.00 is correct, and a debt due and owing to claimant for services, and should be paid.”

Subsequently a written stipulation was entered into by claimant and respondent, as follows:

“The report of the Secretary of State to the Attorney General of the State of Illinois, dated April 11, 1967, ( a copy of which is attached hereto, marked exhibit A, and by this reference incorporated herein, and made a part hereof) shall be admitted into evidence in this proceeding without objection by either party.

“No other or written evidence will be introduced by either party.

“The Commissioner to which this case has been assigned and the Court may make and file their reports, recommendations, orders and decisions based upon the pleadings heretofore filed, and the evidence herein stipulated.

“Neither party objects to the entry of an order in favor of claimant and against respondent in the sum of $200.00.

“Neither party desires to file briefs in this proceeding.

“Both parties waive notice of any hearing, and agree that the aforesaid order may be entered without either party being present.”

This Court has repeatedly held that, where a con[*138]tract has been (1) properly entered into; (2) services satisfactorily performed, and materials eurnished in accordance with such contract; (3) proper charges made therefor; (4)adequate funds were available at the time the contracts were entered into; and, ( 5 ) the appropriation for the biennium from which such claim could have been paid had lapsed, it would enter an award for the amount due. S t . Mary’s Hospital, Decatur, of the Hospital Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, an Illinois Corporation vs. State of Illhois, Case No. 5261, opinion filed February 24,1966. It appears that all qualifications for an award have been met in the instant case.

Claimant, Davidson Division of Fairchild Camera and Instrument Corporation, is, therefore, hereby awarded the sum of $200.00.

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.