{
  "id": 2768238,
  "name": "Patrick J. Sullivan, Jr., Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Sullivan v. State",
  "decision_date": "1951-10-05",
  "docket_number": "No. 4421",
  "first_page": "94",
  "last_page": "97",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "21 Ill. Ct. Cl. 94"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 257,
    "char_count": 3936,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.582,
    "sha256": "01db725b4059be51d2c752553350f59977c2510ff3ea584bed46e6265a033d2c",
    "simhash": "1:10f51c1009897a1e",
    "word_count": 644
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:47:05.247333+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Patrick J. Sullivan, Jr., Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Lansden, J.\nOn December 18, 19 and 20, 1950, the United States Senate Crime Investigating Committee, commonly known as the a Kef an ver Committee\u201d, held public hearings in the United States Court House in Chicago.\nPrior to the commencement of the hearing on the 18th, claimant, Patrick J. Sullivan, Jr., a free lance court reporter, was introduced by Peter G. Kuh, an Assistant State\u2019s Attorney of Cook County, to A. G. Geocaris, then the acting Secretary of the Illinois Liquor Control Commission, in the vicinity of the room where the hearing was to be held.\nClaimant had been employed by the Corporation Counsel of the City of Chicago, and the State\u2019s Attorney of Cook County to report the testimony given at the Chicago hearings of the Kefauver Committee.\nWhen Geocaris learned of this, he talked to claimant about doing some reporting for the Illinois Liquor Control Commission. We assume that Geocaris was authorized, in his official capacity, to bind respondent in whatever arrangement was made with claimant.\nThe dispute in this case arises out of what claimant and Geocaris talked about, since respondent has refused to pay claimant the sum of $443.00 for a copy of the testimony presented at the Committee hearings on December 18 and 19, 1950. Said transcript was 886 pages in length, and was charged for at the customary rate of fifty cents per page.\nClaimant maintains that Geocaris asked for a complete transcript of the Chicago hearings, and is somewhat corroborated by Kuh in this regard.\nGeocaris claims that all the Illinois Liquor Control Commission was interested in was the testimony of Abe Greenberg of the Canadian Ace Brewing Company, and Joseph Fusco of Gold Seal Liquors, two witnesses who were scheduled to appear before the Committee; and,: that all the claimant was supposed to furnish to the Liquor Control Commission was a transcript of the testimony of these two witnesses.\nClaimant furnished Geocaris a transcript of the' first two days\u2019 hearings, and, prior to the commencement of the hearings on the third day, Geocaris learned from counsel for the Committee that Greenberg and Fusco would not appear on account of illness. Thereupon, he called claimant, and told him to do no more reporting for the Liquor Control Commission.\nOn December 21, 1950, claimant billed the Liquor Control Commission for his services, and later talked to Geocaris about his bill, which such Commission finally refused to pay.\nGeocaris retained the transcript furnished him by claimant until March 6, 1951, when it was returned to claimant.\nThe long delay in returning the transcript would seem to indicate that the Liquor Control Commission made some use thereof, yet on the date of December 19th, or prior to the commencement of the hearings of the 20th, Geocaris knew that the transcript already in his hands contained no testimony of Greenberg and Fusco. If the transcript he received was not what he had ordered, Geocaris should have returned it at once. His delay in so doing permits us to draw the inference that his recollection of the so-called \u201cconditional\u201d offer to claimant could have been inaccurate.\nFurthermore, if claimant had not been given an order to furnish the Liquor Control Commission with a copy of the transcript, why did Geocaris call claimant before the third day\u2019s hearing commenced, and instruct him, as Geocaris testified, \u201cto discontinue further services\u201d?\nWe, therefore, conclude that claimant was engaged to furnish a complete transcript of the testimony for the hearings on December 18 and 19, 1950, and is, therefore, entitled to an award.\nAn award is entered in favor of claimant, Patrick J. Sullivan, Jr., in the sum of $443.00.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Lansden, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Ditchburne and Bohling, Attorneys for Claimant.",
      "Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General; William H. Sumpter, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 4421\nPatrick J. Sullivan, Jr., Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOpinion filed October 5, 1951.\nDitchburne and Bohling, Attorneys for Claimant.\nIvan A. Elliott, Attorney General; William H. Sumpter, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0094-01",
  "first_page_order": 126,
  "last_page_order": 129
}