In re Speelman
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as In re Speelman, 2006-Ohio-6322.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO VICTIMS OF CRIME DIVISION www.cco.state.oh.us IN RE: ARCHIE J. SPEELMAN : Case No. V2006-20224 ARCHIE J. SPEELMAN : ORDER OF A THREECOMMISSIONER PANEL Applicant : : : : : : {¶ 1} The applicant filed a reparations application seeking reimbursement of expenses incurred as a result of an October 14, 2005 robbery incident. On January 17, 2006, the Attorney General granted the applicant an award of reparations in the amount of $17.69 for work loss incurred on October 15, 2005. However, the sum was not paid since the amount did not exceed $50.00 as required pursuant to R.C. 2743.191(B). On January 23, 2006, the applicant filed a request for reconsideration contending that he sustained additional work loss. On March 16, 2006, the Attorney General granted the applicant an award of reparations in the amount of $26.91 for work loss incurred on October 15, 2005. However, that sum also was not paid since the amount did not exceed $50.00 as required pursuant to R.C. 2743.191(B). On March 23, 2006, the applicant filed a notice of appeal to the Attorney General s March 16, 2006 Final Decision. Hence, this matter was heard by this panel of three commissioners on September 7, 2006 at 11:05 A.M. {¶ 2} Applicant s counsel and an Assistant Attorney General attended the hearing and presented brief comments and an exhibit for the panel s consideration. Counsel Case No. V2006-20224 -1- ORDER stated that the only issue on appeal concerns whether the applicant sustained work loss for one day or two days. Counsel introduced Exhibit #1, which is a document from the Delaware Cab Company indicating that the applicant sustained two days of work loss as a result of the criminally injurious conduct. The Assistant Attorney General stated that she would like the opportunity to verify whether the applicant actually incurred two days of work loss after the criminally injurious conduct. {¶ 3} From review of the file and with full and careful consideration given to the information presented at the hearing, this panel makes the following determination. We find that the applicant reasonably incurred total work loss in the amount of $53.82 due to missing two days of work as a result of the criminally injurious conduct. Therefore, the March 16, 2006 decision of the Attorney General shall be modified to grant the applicant an award of reparations in the amount of $53.82 for unreimbursed work loss. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT 1) The March 16, 2006 decision of the Attorney General is MODIFIED to render judgment in favor of the applicant in the amount of $53.82; 2) This claim is remanded to the Attorney General for payment of the award; 3) This order is entered without prejudice to the applicant s right to file a supplemental compensation application, within five years of this order, pursuant to R.C. 2743.68; Case No. V2006-20224 -1- ORDER 4) Costs are assumed by the court of claims victims of crime fund. _______________________________________ THOMAS H. BAINBRIDGE Commissioner _______________________________________ LLOYD PIERRE-LOUIS Commissioner _______________________________________ TIM MC CORMACK Commissioner ID #\8-dld-tad-091206 A copy of the foregoing was personally served upon the Attorney General and sent by regular mail to Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney and to: Filed 10-26-2006 Jr. Vol. 2262, Pgs. 49-51 To S.C. Reporter 11-29-2006 Case No. V2006-20224 -1- ORDER
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
