{
  "id": 3114014,
  "name": "Calvin Cotner, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cotner v. State",
  "decision_date": "1987-08-11",
  "docket_number": "No. 83-CC-1840",
  "first_page": "70",
  "last_page": "73",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "40 Ill. Ct. Cl. 70"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "25 Ill. Ct. Cl. 1",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        2786780
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/25/0001-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "35 Ill. Ct. Cl. 693",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        6057363
      ],
      "year": 1964,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "695"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/35/0693-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 10",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        5327695
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "14-15"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/32/0010-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 260,
    "char_count": 3380,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.897,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.2269389344706595e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7783175775885003
    },
    "sha256": "c0362291758fba2867021536bac7f7bce8acf24536c7cd4ff89b1f98a2e03bce",
    "simhash": "1:236510f25176a75b",
    "word_count": 564
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:58:26.190856+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Calvin Cotner, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "OPINION\nRaucci, J.\nThis matter is a tort action arising out of an accident on June 22, 1987, wherein the Claimant was riding a motorcycle at 31st Street and Brainard Avenue in LaGrange Park, Illinois, when he allegedly went over a bump and went out of control, falling to the pavement and receiving severe injuries.\nThe issue is whether the State had constructive notice by reason of a companion cyclist, who stated a year earlier he went over the same bump and it jarred his tape player so that the tape fell to the ground.\nMike Lavelle, the companion cyclist, testified the bump was six inches high and that he never complained about the bump and never notified the Illinois Department of Transportation. Police officer William Boalwag, the investigating officer, estimated the bump was approximately four inches high. The Claimant\u2019s father measured the bump at 4% inches high. The Department of Transportation field technician estimated the height as between 1M to 3 inches.\nV. Cigunelis, a field maintenance technician, testified that he made yearly visual inspection and did not see such a bump. No deficiency was discovered or reported on 31st Street in his February 1982 inspection. There were no notifications by police departments, no public complaints, and no agencies\u2019 employees reported any deficiency.\nThe State is not an insurer of the safety of users of highways. As pointed out by Respondent, the State need only maintain its roads in a reasonably safe condition. (Laine v. State (1977), 32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 10, 14-15.) The burden is upon Claimant to show that the State had actual or constructive notice of defects that cause injuries. (Norman v. State (1982), 35 Ill. Ct. Cl. 693, 695.) \u201cThe mere fact that a defective condition existed if, in fact, it did exist, is not in and by itself sufficient to constitute an act of negligence on the part of the Respondent.\u201d Palmer v. Northern Illinois University (1964), 25 Ill. Ct. Cl. 1.\nIn the instant case, the State conducted an investigation of the affected roadway four months before the accident. No defect was observed. No complaints were received. According to the record, this case represents the only reported accident at this area of roadway.\nThe testimony of Lavelle is insufficient to charge Respondent with notice of the defect in the road. He testified that he hit the \u201csame\u201d bump one year earlier. He was operating his motorcycle at a speed of 40 to 45 miles per hour and did not lose control of his cycle. After his tape fell to the street, his examination of the bump consisted of taking \u201ckind of a glance at it.\u201d Under all the circumstances of this case, the testimony of Lavelle is insufficient to show constructive notice on the State.\nIt is therefore ordered that the claim be, and hereby is dismissed, with prejudice.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Raucci, J."
      },
      {
        "text": "ORDER ON DENIAL OF REHEARING\nRaucci, J.\nThis cause coming on to be heard on the Claimant\u2019s petition for rehearing, the Court being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ordered that the Claimant\u2019s petition for rehearing is denied.",
        "type": "rehearing",
        "author": "Raucci, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Komessar, Wintroub & Cirignani (Mark Komessar, of counsel), for Claimant.",
      "Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Ralanda Webb, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 83-CC-1840\nCalvin Cotner, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOpinion filed August 11, 1987.\nOrder on denial of rehearing filed November 2, 1987.\nKomessar, Wintroub & Cirignani (Mark Komessar, of counsel), for Claimant.\nNeil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Ralanda Webb, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0070-01",
  "first_page_order": 172,
  "last_page_order": 175
}