Court of Claims of Illinois, 1952

Delaney v. State

Delaney v. State
Court of Claims of Illinois · Decided February 8, 1952 · Schuman
21 Ill. Ct. Cl. 191

Counsel

Anton B. Mutz, Attorney for Claimant., Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General; C. Arthur Nebel, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Delaney v. State

Opinion of the Court

Schuman, C. J.

The respondent has filed a motion to dismiss the claim filed herein on the ground that the complaint is insufficient in law, because it fails to allege respondent had actual or constructive notice of the defect alleged in the complaint.

In order to charge the State with negligence, it is necessary to allege that the State had actual or constructive notice of the defect, and that said defect was dangerous and unsafe for ordinary travel.

The complaint fails to charge such notice, and the motion to dismiss is sustained.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.