Union Electric Co. v. State of Illinois — 37 Ill. Ct. Cl. 301

UNION ELECTRIC Co., Claimant, v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought payment for electrical service rendered in 1977. The court dismissed the claim as untimely under the five-year statute of limitations for contract claims, holding that the complaint filed in 1984 was barred.

Claim type: Lapsed Appropriation

Statutes cited: Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 37, par. 439.22(a)

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

Headnotes

STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS-action on contract must be brought within five years. All claims arising out of a contract must.be filed with the Court of Claims within five years of the date the cause of action accrues, or should be forever barred.
ComAcrs-electric service-Zupsed appropriation-barred by fiveyear limitations period. The Claimant’s lapsed appropriation claim for electric service rendered to the State was dismissed, since the claim involved service provided more than five years earlier, and was therefore barred by the five-year limitations period applicable to actions arising out of a contract.
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS

POPE & DRIEMEYER, for Claimant. NEIL F. HARTIGAN, Attorney General (SUE MUELLER, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.

RAUCCI, J.

This cause coming on to be heard on the Respondent’s motion to dismiss and the Court being duly advised in the premises:

Finds, that the Claimant’s complaint was filed on April 6, 1984. Exhibit A to the complaint and the departmental report establish that the electrical service was rendered between June 21, 1977, and July 21, 1977. Claimant’s response to the motion to dismiss now asserts that “the claim is for ‘the balance remaining due for current charges on the account involved herein after applying the most recent payment received from the Staie of Illinois first to the previous balance on this account and then applying the remaining balance of such payment to current charges.’ ” (Emphasis added)

This position is untenable. If this claim were for current service, it would not be filed in this Court at this time, but would be paid out of the current appropriation. Additionally why would Claimant attach a 1977 invoice to justify a current claim?

This is a lapsed appropriation claim, which stems from a contract. Section 22(a) of the Court of Claims Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1983, ch. 37, par. 439.22(a)) establishes that all claims arising out of contract must be filed with the Court of Claims within five years of the date the cause of action accrues, or should be forever barred. This claim has not been timely filed.

[*303] It is hereby ordered that this cause is dismissed with prejudice.

ORDER ON MOTION TO RECONSIDER

This cause coming on to be heard on the Claimant’s. motion to reconsider, the Court being fully advised in the premises:

The motion to reconsider should be denied for the reasons stated in the Respondent’s memorandum in opposition to Claimant’s suggestions in support of motion to reconsider.

It is therefore ordered that the motion to reconsider be, and it is hereby, denied.