Illinois Court of Claims Opinions
General Court of Claims
Download PDF

Robert Mc Graw v. State of Illinois

33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 214 Illinois Court of Claims Filed 1980-06-24 No. 77-CC-1981
Disposition: (No. 77-CC-1981-Claimant awarded $29,241.43.) Award: $29,241.43 Agency: Department of Local Government Affairs
Cite as: Robert Mc Graw v. State of Illinois, 33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 214 (1980)
General Court of Claims 33 awarded 1980s Robert Mc Graw v. State of Illinois 33 Ill. Ct. Cl. 214 1980-06-24 (No. 77-CC-1981-Claimant awarded $29,241.43.) /opinions/v33-p0290-1/

ROBERT Mc GRAW, Claimant, v . THE STATE OF ILLINOIS DEPART- MENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought back pay for a wrongful layoff from February 20, 1974 through June 30, 1976. The court found he was entitled to $29,241.43 in mitigated losses and awarded that amount.

Claim type: Employment Back Pay

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

Headnotes

  1. WILLIAM J. SCOTT, Attorney General (WILLIAM E. WEBBER, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent. STATE EMPLOYEES BACK SALARY CLAIMS-Wrongful discharge.

On October 20,1977, Claimant filed his complaint in this Court seeking recovery for loss of wages for the period of February 20, 1974, through June 30, 1976, during which time he alleges he was laid off and prevented from performing his duties as a Community Representative I1 with the Department of Local Government Affairs, State of Illinois.

On February 20,1974, the Claimant was laid off and said layoff was approved by the director of the Department of Personnel, State of Illinois. The reason given for the layoff was material reorganization and budgetary limitations. Claimant requested a layoff reconsideration hearing as provided for by personnel rules, but the director of personnel upheld the layoff.

[*215] Claimant filed a petition with the Illinois Civil Service Commission alleging that his layoff was a subterfuge for a discharge and that a probationary employee within the same organizational unit had not been laid off prior to laying off a certified employee.

On October 15, 1975, the Civil Service Commission ruled that Claimant was wrongfully laid off from his position with the Department of Local Government Affairs, State of Illinois and ordered his reinstatement.

On November 5, 1975, the Department of Local Government Affairs filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Sangamon County for an administrative review of the decision of the Civil Service Commission. On October 18, 1976, the Circuit Court entered an order upholding and affirming the decision of the Civil Service Commission. The State of Illinois on November 8, 1976, filed a Notice of Appeal.

While the appeal was pending, the director of the Department of Personnel, State of Illinois, decided to reconsider the original layoff decision and upon such reconsideration, determined that Robert Mc Graw’s rights as a certified employee had in fact been violated, and revised the layoff decision retroactive to February 20, 1974, with full restoration of rights to that date.

After Claimant made demands for full back pay and such demand was refused, he has made a claim for the period from February 20, 1974, through June 30, 1976, with the total claim being in the sum of $33,402.91, including mitigation of his losses.

During the layoff the Claimant was engaged in the real estate business, thereby mitigating his losses.

From the record in this case, the Court is of the opinion that Claimant is entitled to an award of $29,241.43 [*216] which represents his mitigated losses for the years 1974, 1975 and 1976.

An award is, hereby, made to Claimant, Robert Mc Graw, in the sum of $29,241.43 less deductions for Federal and State Income Taxes, State Employees Retirement System and Social Security.

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.