Brady v. State

Court of Claims of Illinois

Brady v. State

32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 240, 1977 Ill. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 178

CourtCourt of Claims of Illinois

DecidedSeptember 28, 1977

DocketNo. 77-CC-1494

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 240 (Brady v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Claims of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brady v. State, 32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 240, 1977 Ill. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 178 (Ill. Super. Ct. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Polos, C.J.

Claimant, an inmate of an Illinois correctional facility, has brought this action to recover the value of certain items of property, of which Claimant alleges he is being deprived by officials of the Illinois Department of Corrections. The complaint herein alleges that when Claimant was transferred to a new institution he “was then told by prison officials that certain items in his property (sic) was not allowed in this institution, and that it would be stored in the personal property room and returned to me upon my release from the institution.”

Claimant does not allege that Respondent converted his property, or was negligent in safeguarding it. Rather, Claimant complains about an administrative regulation of the institution in which he is incarcerated, and this Court clearly is without jurisdiction to interfere in such matters.

The Court therefore finds that the complaint herein fails to state a cause upon which relief can be granted, and is accordingly dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Polos, C.J.

Claimant, an inmate of an Illinois correctional facility, has brought this action to recover the value of certain items of property, of which Claimant alleges he is being deprived by officials of the Illinois Department of Corrections. The complaint herein alleges that when Claimant was transferred to a new institution he “was then told by prison officials that certain items in his property (sic) was not allowed in this institution, and that it would be stored in the personal property room and returned to me upon my release from the institution.”

Claimant does not allege that Respondent converted his property, or was negligent in safeguarding it. Rather, Claimant complains about an administrative regulation of the institution in which he is incarcerated, and this Court clearly is without jurisdiction to interfere in such matters.

The Court therefore finds that the complaint herein fails to state a cause upon which relief can be granted, and is accordingly dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 Ill. Ct. Cl. 240, 1977 Ill. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brady-v-state-ilclaimsct-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack