In re APPLICATION OF JOHN HORVAT.
Case summary
Claimant sought compensation under the Crime Victims Compensation Act for injuries to his minor son, who was accidentally shot. The court denied the claim because the injury resulted from an accidental shooting, which is not compensable under the Act.
Statutes cited: Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 70, par. 71 et seq.; Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 38, par. 12-5
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- T YRONE C. F AHNER, Attorney General (MAUR EE N CAIN, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.
- C RIM E VICTIMS COMPENSATION AcT-uccidentul shooting-claim denied. Crime Victims Compensation Act is not intended to compensate for injuries suffered as a result of accidental shootings, and where victim was shot while friend was demonstrating how to load and unload weapon, claim would be denied, notwithstanding fact that person who shot victim was convicted of reckless conduct.
This claim arises out of an incident that occurred on April 18, 1980. John Horvat, father of the minor victim, Stanley Horvat, seeks compensation pursuant to the provisions of the Crime Victims Compensation Act, hereafter referred to as the Act. Ill. ,Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 70, par. 71 et seq.
This Court has carefully considered the application for benefits submitted on the form prescribed by the Court, and an investigatory report of the Attorney General of Illinois which substantiates matters set forth in the application. Based upon these documents and other evidence submitted to the Court, the Court finds:
1. That on April 18, 1980, the victim was accidentally shot by Mr. James Adams, whom the victim knew. The incident occurred while the victim and his friend were being shown several guns by Mr. Adams in his residence at 1004 Belleview, Rockdale, Illinois. Initially, the victim and Mr. Adams informed police that the victim was shot when the gun fell from the kitchen table and fired. However, during the police investigation, the vic[*536]tim’s friend stated that the victim was shot while Mr. Adams was demonstrating how to load and unload the guns. As he was unloading one of the guns, it fired and the bullet struck the victim in the stomach. The victim confirmed this account of the incident to the police. The victim was taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital for treatment of his injuries. Mr. Adams was prosecuted and convicted on the charge of reckless conduct.
2. That the person who shot the victim was convicted of one of the violent crimes set forth under section 2(c) of the Act, to wit: reckless conduct (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1977, ch. 38, par. 12-5). However, the victim sustained his injury as a result of an accidental shooting. It is not the intent of the Crime Victims Compensation Act to compensate injuries suffered as a result of an accidental shooting.
3. That the Claimant has not met a required condition precedent for compensation under the Act.
It is hereby ordered, that this claim be, and is hereby denied.
( No . 81-C\’-0336-Claim denied.)
In re APPLICATION OF NATALIE S MITH.
Order filed September 17, 1981.
NATALIE S MITH, pro se, for Claimant.
TYRONE C. FAHNER, Attorney General (M AUREEN C AIN, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent.
CRIMEVICTIMS COMPENSATION ACT-untimely notificution of pokeckuim denied. Claim for benefits under Crime Victims Compensation Act [*537] denied where victim of sexual assault failed to notify police of attack until nine days later and victim did not establish that delay in notification was timely under circumstances.
POCH,J.
This claim arises out of an incident that occurred on August 22, 1981, as a result of which the Claimant seeks compensation pursuant to the provisions of the Crime Victims Compensation Act, hereafter referred to as the Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1979, ch. 70, par. 71 et seq.
This Court has carefully considered the application for benefits submitted on October 24, 1980, on the form prescribed by the Attorney General, and an investigatory report of the Attorney General of Illinois. Based upon these documents and other evidence submitted to the Court, the Court finds:
1. That on August 22, 1981, the Claimant was allegedly accosted by an unknown offender who tried to sexually assault her. The incident occurred in a parking lot in the rear of the Chug-a-Lug tavern at 40 S. Lake Street, Mundelein, Illinois. The attack was interrupted when the Claimant’s ex-husband came out of the bar and recognized her voice. The Claimant then ran from the offender, fell and allegedly injured her hand. Three days later, on August 25, 1981, the Claimant was treated for injuries sustained as a result of the incident. On August 31, 1981, the Claimant and her former husband went to the Mundelein police station to report the crime. The offender has not been apprehended.
2. That according to section 6.l(c) of the Act a person is entitled to compensation under this Act if the appropriate law enforcement officials were notified of the perpetration of the crime allegedly causing the death or injury to the victim within 72 hours or in the event such notification was made more than 72 hours after the perpetration of the crime, the applicant establishes that [*538] such notice was timely under the circumstances.
3. That the Claimant notified law enforcement officials nine days after the perpetration of the crime.
4. That by reason of the Claimant's failure to establish that such notification nine days after the perpetration of the crime was timely under the circumstances, the Claimant is not eligible for compensation under the Act.
It is therefore ordered that this claim be, and is hereby denied.