{
  "id": 2723241,
  "name": "Jeannette Lewis, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lewis v. State",
  "decision_date": "1977-05-06",
  "docket_number": "No. 76-2736",
  "first_page": "552",
  "last_page": "554",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "31 Ill. Ct. Cl. 552"
    }
  ],
  "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": 241,
    "char_count": 3634,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.855,
    "sha256": "4df6b5543d717b171555c17435070d98fcc61ab6a496da2971cc14d4795e9e6e",
    "simhash": "1:49b27a9af879e210",
    "word_count": 565
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:56:35.411419+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jeannette Lewis, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Spivack, J.\nThis matter is before the Court on Claimant\u2019s Complaint, Respondent\u2019s Motion to Dismiss, Claimant\u2019s Response to Respondent\u2019s Motion to Dismiss and Respondent\u2019s Motion to Strike Claimant\u2019s Response.\nSince there appears to be no significant dispute as to the facts giving rise to the claim, but only as to the effect of the law applicable to said facts, we are of the opinion that our ruling on the pending motions is dis-positive of the entire matter.\nThe facts upon which the parties agree are briefly as follows:\nClaimant was an employee of the Illinois Department of Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities during the period October 15, 1974, to June 16, 1976. During this period, although her job classification was \"Administrative Clerk,\u201d she claimed that she was in fact performing services entitling her to the classification \"Executive I,\u201d a higher paid classification. The director of the Department of Personnel decided this claim adversely to Claimant, and she appealed to the Illinois Civil Service Commission which, on June 16, 1976, reversed the prior adverse ruling and granted her the relief sought in that proceeding. As a result of and in accordance with those proceedings, the Department of Mental Health paid Claimant the sum of One Thousand Seventeen Dollars ($1,017.00), representing the salary difference between the classifications \"Administrative Clerk\u201d and \"Executive I\u201d for the period fiscal 1975 \u2014 1976. The Department did not pay Claimant the sum of Five Hundred Fifty-Two Dollars ($552.00) which amount represents the salary difference for the period she was employed during fiscal 1974 \u2014 1975. This non-payment occurred because the funds appropriated for such purpose had lapsed. Claimant here seeks reimbursement for said sum.\nThe State argues that Claimant\u2019s claim must be denied on two grounds: first, that the Department of Personnel issued a regulation in conformance with the decision of the Civil Service Commission retroactively changing Claimant\u2019s position classification as of July 1, 1975 (and not as of October 15, 1974); second, that Claimant\u2019s proper remedy was a review of the Department of Personnel\u2019s regulation in the Circuit Court; and, having failed to do that, she is statutorily precluded from maintaining her action here since she did not exhaust all of her remedies.\nWe do not believe that the intent of the regulation of the Department of Personnel was to limit Claimant\u2019s job classification to the period commencing July 1, 1975. On the contrary, we believe that the said regulation was intended simply to give efficacy to the decision of the Civil Service Commission which retroactively changed the classification for the period when Claimant actually performed the services giving rise to the higher classification. Undoubtedly the regulation in question was limited as it was because the Department was aware of the fact that the funds had lapsed. To hold otherwise would be an unequitable distortion of the findings of the Civil Service Commission.\nIn view of our interpretation of the regulation of the Department of Personnel, it is not necessary to consider the question of Claimant\u2019s exhaustion of other remedies.\nClaimant, Jeannette Lewis, is therefore awarded the sum of Five Hundred Fifty-Two Dollars ($552.00) less proper deductions on account of taxes, pension and the like.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Spivack, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Goldberg & Murphy, Ltd., by Jerome F. Goldberg, Attorney for Claimants.",
      "William J. Scott, Attorney General; Paul M. Singpiehl, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 76-2736\nJeannette Lewis, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOpinion filed May 6, 1977.\nGoldberg & Murphy, Ltd., by Jerome F. Goldberg, Attorney for Claimants.\nWilliam J. Scott, Attorney General; Paul M. Singpiehl, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0552-01",
  "first_page_order": 602,
  "last_page_order": 604
}