SUSAN D. BROWN, Commissioner.
Findings of Fact
On June 14, 1989, in Franklin County, Ohio, the injured party, Tausha M. Lawson, suffered personal injury as a result of an assault by Robert F. Latham. The applicant, Karen D. Latham, is the injured party's mother.
The assault was reported to the Columbus Police Department within seventy-two hours after the occurrence.
The assailant pled guilty to felonious assault.
The Attorney General has recommended the applicant's claim be denied pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(D) since all of the applicant's economic loss has been, or may be, reimbursed from collateral sources. Further, the Attorney General has recommended the claim be denied pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(B) because an award of reparations to the applicant would unjustly benefit the offender and the interests of justice do not require that an award be made in this particular case.
After careful review of the reparations application, the finding of fact and recommendation of the Attorney General, and the documents and evidence contained in the case file, I make the following determination.
As a result of the criminally injurious conduct in this claim, the applicant has incurred allowable expense in the amount of $94. However, all of the applicant's allowable expense has been, or may be, reimbursed by collateral sources. In addition, Robert F. Latham, the offender, incurred $156 for services provided by Dr. Kessler to the injured party on the day of the incident. Pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(B):
"Neither a single commissioner nor a panel of commissioners shall make an award of reparations to a claimant who is the offender or an accomplice of the offender who committed the criminally injurious conduct, nor to any claimant if the award would unjustly benefit the offender or accomplice."
Therefore, I find an award for the expenses incurred with Dr. Kessler in the amount of $156 would unjustly benefit the offender, the responsible party. Further, the file does not contain evidence which indicates that the interests of justice require an award be made in this case. Thus, the claim for the expenses incurred by the offender, in the amount of $156, is denied.
Conclusions of Law
Pursuant to R.C. 2743.51 through 2743.72, I find the applicant qualifies as a claimant; however, an award of reparations is denied pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(D) since all "allowable expense," as defined in R.C. 2743.51(F), has been, or may be, recouped from collateral sources.
Further, the applicant's claim for expenses incurred by the offender, in the amount of $156, is denied pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(B) because an award to the applicant for the expenses would unjustly benefit the offender, the responsible party.
Order
1. Judgment is entered for applicant; however, no award is granted due to collateral source availability.
2. This order is entered without prejudice to the applicant's right to file a supplemental reparations application pursuant to R.C. 2743.60(D) and 2743.68 if the applicant submits timely application to a collateral source for payment but does not receive reimbursement from that source.
3. Costs are to be assumed by the reparations fund.
So ordered.