Dunnett v. Racing Commission

West Virginia Court of Claims

Dunnett v. Racing Commission

24 Ct. Cl. 52

CourtWest Virginia Court of Claims

DecidedDecember 18, 2001

DocketCC-01-412

StatusPublished

This text of 24 Ct. Cl. 52 (Dunnett v. Racing Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering West Virginia Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dunnett v. Racing Commission, 24 Ct. Cl. 52 (W. Va. Super. Ct. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This claim was submitted for decision based upon the allegations in the Notice of Claim and respondent's Answer.

Claimant seeks $2,125.00 for providing consultant services and expert testimony forrespondent. The documentation for these services was notprocessedfor payment within the appropriate fiscal year; therefore, claimant has not been paid. In its Answer, respondent admits the validity of the claim as well as the amount, and states that there were sufficient funds expired in the appropriate fiscal year from which the invoice could have been paid. The Court is aware that respondent does not have a fiscal method for paying claims of this nature; therefore, the claim has been submitted to this Court for determination.

In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion to and does make an [53]*53award to claimant in the amount of $2,125.00.

Award of $2,125.00.

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

PER CURIAM:

This claim was submitted for decision based upon the allegations in the Notice of Claim and respondent's Answer.

Claimant seeks $2,125.00 for providing consultant services and expert testimony forrespondent. The documentation for these services was notprocessedfor payment within the appropriate fiscal year; therefore, claimant has not been paid. In its Answer, respondent admits the validity of the claim as well as the amount, and states that there were sufficient funds expired in the appropriate fiscal year from which the invoice could have been paid. The Court is aware that respondent does not have a fiscal method for paying claims of this nature; therefore, the claim has been submitted to this Court for determination.

In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion to and does make an [53]*53award to claimant in the amount of $2,125.00.

Award of $2,125.00.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 Ct. Cl. 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunnett-v-racing-commission-wvctcl-2001.