{
  "id": 93077,
  "name": "Bobby L. Byrd, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Byrd v. State",
  "decision_date": "1997-12-03",
  "docket_number": "No. 97-CC-3039",
  "first_page": "223",
  "last_page": "224",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "53 Ill. Ct. Cl. 223"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "40 Ill. Ct. Cl. 1",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        3112685
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/40/0001-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "44 Ill. Ct. Cl. 326",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        3049020
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/44/0326-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 128,
    "char_count": 1298,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.831,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.003026238209254671
    },
    "sha256": "206cd30011a07f1b5826ef5ade051e7cb930a91c3ec06e9e55a4bb409bad0f32",
    "simhash": "1:68bc9abe136e36f1",
    "word_count": 217
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:18:04.556911+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Bobby L. Byrd, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "OPINION\nSommer, C.J.\nThis claim arises on the Respondents motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, motion for summary judgment.\nThe Claimant is an inmate who seeks damages due to personal injuiy.\nThe Respondents motion states that the Claimant did not exhaust his remedies, as required by section 25 of the Court of Claims Act (705ILCS 505/25), as he filed no grievance with the prison authorities or the Department of Corrections. See McCormick v. State (1992), 44 Ill. Ct. Cl. 326.\nThe Claimant argues that to grieve his claim would be useless, as the Department of Corrections does not grant awards from its tort claims funds for pain and suffering or permanent injuiy.\nWe agree. The exhaustion of remedies provision of the Court of Claims Act does not require a claimant to pursue an alleged remedy that does not exist under any set of facts. Tunk v. State (1987), 40 Ill. Ct. Cl. 1.\nTo the extent that McCormick, supra, is inconsistent with our ruling in this claim, it is overruled.\nIt is therefore ordered that the Respondents motion is denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Sommer, C.J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Bobby L. Byrd, pro se.",
      "Jim Ryan, Attorney General (Christopher L. Higgerson, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 97-CC-3039\nBobby L. Byrd, Claimant, v. The State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOpinion filed December 3, 1997.\nBobby L. Byrd, pro se.\nJim Ryan, Attorney General (Christopher L. Higgerson, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0223-01",
  "first_page_order": 411,
  "last_page_order": 412
}