{
  "id": 3144404,
  "name": "Walter Montgomery, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Montgomery v. State",
  "decision_date": "1988-12-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 87-CC-3186",
  "first_page": "190",
  "last_page": "193",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "41 Ill. Ct. Cl. 190"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "39 Ill. Ct. Cl. 221",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 248,
    "char_count": 4139,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.908,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.505882454708161e-08,
      "percentile": 0.51890998278278
    },
    "sha256": "b94873095c3827b659d09122094d7cdb51c4d26d0aecaf320883acf2429a52d1",
    "simhash": "1:22e4643889c4d182",
    "word_count": 645
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:56:46.892024+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Walter Montgomery, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Raucci, J.\nThis is a prisoner personal property case combined with a claim for lost prisoner pay on two separate occasions when the Claimant was found to have been wrongfully removed from his job assignment.\nFirst, with respect to Claimants claim for lost personal property, Claimant testified that on November 22, 1985, Claimant \u201cwas walked\u201d from his job assignment on a disciplinary ticket. He was not allowed to stop at his cell to gather his personal property. On the next day, while Claimant was in segregation, it was discovered that a substantial amount of his property was missing. The institutional inquiry board ordered an investigation into Claimant\u2019s loss of his personal property and the institutional investigation determined that Claimant\u2019s property was lost due to staff negligence. Claimant claimed that the value of his lost personal property was $299.90.\nThe institutional administrative board determined that Claimant\u2019s loss was $150.00. This amount was deposited to Claimant\u2019s trust account. Claimant failed to make any proof of the value of his property other than what may have been set forth on Claimant\u2019s bill of particulars.\nWith respect to Claimant\u2019s claim pertaining to lost pay, Claimant was removed from his job assignment on disciplinary tickets on two separate occasions. First, on November 22,1985, Claimant was removed from his job assignment until February 20, 1986. The institutional administrative board later determined that this removal was wrongful. Again on May 17, 1986, Claimant was removed from his job assignment and this removal was also determined to have been wrongful and Claimant was reinstated.\nDuring both occasions that Claimant was removed, he received a reduced rate of pay at $10.00 per month, instead of $26.00 per month (Respondent\u2019s brief, page 1).\nRespondent takes the position that Claimant failed to offer any proof of the value of his property and cites Hale v. State (1986), 39 Ill. Ct. Cl. 221.\nWith respect to Claimant\u2019s claims pertaining to lost pay, Respondent has taken the position that prison employment is a privilege and not a right (citing administrative regulations). Institution regulations do not provide for payment of \u201cback pay\u201d when it is determined that an inmate is removed from his employment status wrongfully.\nOn the record in this case, it is impossible to determine that the amount paid to Claimant for his lost personal property was inadequate. It is the responsibility of Claimant to come forward with proof of value. Claimant failed to adduce any proof of value.\nThat portion of Claimant\u2019s claim pertaining to lost income from wrongful removal from a job assignment invites the Court to adjudicate the fairness or propriety of the administrative regulations applicable to the Department of Corrections and the provisions pertaining to prisoner job assignments. During the entire time that Claimant\u2019s disciplinary tickets were under consideration, Claimant received $10.00 per month for unassigned State pay (Respondent\u2019s brief, page 3). This is the amount Claimant was entitled to since he was not assigned to a job at that time (Respondent\u2019s brief, page 3). Perhaps most importantly, Claimant offered no evidence that the disciplinary tickets which gave rise to Claimant\u2019s removal from his job assignment were negligently or wrongfully issued. Claimant asked this Court to rely upon the act of the administrative personnel in the prison, in restoring Claimant to his job assignment, upon which to predicate total liability in this Court. This Court has not previously acted as a court of review over the administration of prison regulations except in cases where proof of violations of existing regulations tends to establish liability of the Respondent under recognized principles of tort law.\nIt is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Claimant\u2019s claim be denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Raucci, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Walter Montgomery, pro se, for Claimant.",
      "Neil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Kimberly L. Dahlen, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 87-CC-3186\nWalter Montgomery, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOpinion filed December 19, 1988.\nWalter Montgomery, pro se, for Claimant.\nNeil F. Hartigan, Attorney General (Kimberly L. Dahlen, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0190-01",
  "first_page_order": 280,
  "last_page_order": 283
}