Legal Opinion

In re Korneder

Court of Claims of Illinois

Decided March 28, 1983No. 76-CV-1240PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPoch, J.

This cause was heard on oral argument at the request of Claimant, to deny the motion of the Attorney General to dismiss the claim for the reason that claim has failed to show a pecuniary loss of $200 or more as required by section 3(b) of the Crime Victims Compensation Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 70, par. 73(b).

The thrust of Claimant’s argument is that because of the representation of the Attorney General’s office to Claimant’s attorney that there would be no exclusion to the compensation received by Claimant under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, the State is estopped by such…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. BrophyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  2. Hughes v. Illinois Public Aid CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Harbeck v. StateCourt of Claims of Illinois · 1943
  4. Isko Co. v. StateCourt of Claims of Illinois · 1921
  5. Lord & Bushnell Co. v. StateCourt of Claims of Illinois · 1944

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re CoreasCourt of Claims of Illinois · 1987
  2. Klopfer v. Illinois Department of Public AidCourt of Claims of Illinois · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API