Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
General Court of Claims
Download PDF

Michael J. Baubkus v. State of Illinois

33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 121 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1979-10-29 No. 76-CC-1493
Disposition: (No. 76-CC-1493-Claim denied.)
Cite as: Michael J. Baubkus v. State of Illinois, 33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 121 (1979)
General Court of Claims 33 denied 1970s Michael J. Baubkus v. State of Illinois 33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 121 1979-10-29 (No. 76-CC-1493-Claim denied.) /opinions/v33-p0197-1/

MICHAEL J. BAUBKUS, Claimant, 2). THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant, a quadriplegic, sought to have the State's failure to file notice of claim waived under section 22 of the Court of Claims Act, arguing his disability prevented timely notice. The court denied the motion, finding the failure was due to his attorney's error, not his disability, and dismissed the claim for failure to file notice within the statutory time.

Claim type: Other

Statutes cited: Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 37, par. 439.22

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

Headnotes

  1. PERSONAL hjwm-notice requirement. Where Claimant, a quadriplegic, hired an attorney and the attorney failed to file the required notice of intent to commence a personal injury claim, the error was not due to Claimant’s disability, and the claim was denied.

This matter comes before the Court upon a motion of Claimant requesting that this Court find that Respondent, the State of Illinois, has waived any defense based upon the failure to file notice of claim or the failure to file a notice of claim within apt time.

Claimant has based his motion upon section 22 of the Court of Claims Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 37, par. 439.22). This section provides that in certain enumerated instances, the time of giving notice can be postponed. The disability of Claimant in this case is not specifically covered under the statute but it is Claimant’s contention that the statute is broad enough to cover the situation.

Claimant is a quadriplegic who hired an attorney and the attorney failed to give the requisite notice. The facts disclose that the failure to give notice was not caused by the Claimant’s disability but rather by the failure on the part of his attorney to file notice in apt time.

It is therefore the opinion of this Court that section 22 of the Court of Claims Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 37, par. 439.22) is not available as a defense for the failure to file notice at the stated time. The error was a human error and not due to the disability of Claimant.

It is hereby ordered that motion of Claimant be, and [*123] the same is, denied and this cause is dismissed for failure to file notice within the time required by statute.

Official volume 33 (Containing cases in which opinions were filed and orders of dismissal entered, without opinion for: Fiscal Year 1980 – July 1, 1979–June 30, 1980)  ·  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.