{
  "id": 2839526,
  "name": "David R. Forgan et al, Receivers of Central Union Telephone Co., a Corporation v. State of Illinois",
  "name_abbreviation": "Forgan v. State",
  "decision_date": "1920-09-20",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "84",
  "last_page": "85",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "4 Ill. Ct. Cl. 84"
    }
  ],
  "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": 204,
    "char_count": 3067,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "sha256": "7554f7a97532bfe2490ac169e4129ce478c101ad8f119e08adaa32e20b3b2270",
    "simhash": "1:10f6aa360b6b9d2d",
    "word_count": 450
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:11:37.214460+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "David R. Forgan et al, Receivers of Central Union Telephone Co., a Corporation v. State of Illinois."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "This suit is brought by claimants to recover for services rendered by Central Union Company, a Corporation, as disclosed in the statement of facts following: The declaration alleges the appointment of\nclaimants, receivers, etc., and that as receivers they were engaged in transmitting local and long distance telephone messages in and obout , Springfield, Illinois, and charges were made therefore according to fixed and established schedule of rates.\nThat on January 8th, 1915, said receivers entered into a contract with the State of Illinois through its Secretary of State to furnish long distance telephone messages for the 49th General Assembly of the.State of Illinois, to and including the 15th day of April, 1915.\nPursuant to such agreement, said receivers rendered services in accordance with the time of the contract, which aggregated $1,952.40. To pay this, an appropriation was made by the 49th General Assembly, but inadverently, this appropriation was certified to pay tolls of members of the 49th. General Assembly and State refused to pay it. Later $401.00 of this was by individual members of that Assembly, thus redusing the amount to $1,551.40, which remains unpaid. A bill of particulars is presented in evidence showing each and all the items of charges and likewise similar services were rendered as follows:\nFor Public Utilities...................................$ 122.40\nSecretary o\u00ed State...................................... 236.80\nIllinois and Michigan Canal............................. 18.15\nLater, the Secretary of State paid $77.03, reducing the last item to $158.77. It appears that there remains due and unpaid upon these various items of charges the following:\nGeneral Assembly .....................................$1,551.40\nPublic Utilities ....................................... 122.90\nIllinois and Michigan Canal............................. 18.15\nBalance from Secretary of State......................... 158.77\nTotal\n$1,851.22\nWhen the Secretary of State made partial payment of claims charged to his department, he stated that was all the available funds he now had on hand. A demurrer was filed to this declaration, which was not sustained; and after all proof was fully submitted; the Attorney General consents to the payment of the balance of the claim or claims.\nThe claim being sustained by the evidence, we are of the opinion that the claim is meritorious, and should be paid.\nSince the institution of these proceedings, Charles E. Clark has been substituted attorney for Central \"Union Telephone Co.; Inc., which likewise has been substituted as claimant herein. In view of the foregoing, we awarded the substituted claimant the sum of $1,851.22.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": null
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Edward J. Brundage, Attorney General, for State."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "David R. Forgan et al, Receivers of Central Union Telephone Co., a Corporation v. State of Illinois.\nOpinion filed September 20, 1920.\nContract \u2014 telephone service. Where claimant furnishes telephone services to the State under a contract with the State for such service he is entitled to recover for the service rendered.\nEdward J. Brundage, Attorney General, for State."
  },
  "file_name": "0084-01",
  "first_page_order": 100,
  "last_page_order": 101
}