{
  "id": 3047176,
  "name": "In re Application of Alfred R. Pelt",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Pelt",
  "decision_date": "1992-04-07",
  "docket_number": "No. 91-CV-1716",
  "first_page": "500",
  "last_page": "503",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "44 Ill. Ct. Cl. 500"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "31 Ill. Ct. Cl. 710",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        2722276
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/31/0710-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 391",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "case_ids": [
        2710262
      ],
      "year": 1976,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-ct-cl/34/0391-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 401",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 252,
    "char_count": 4545,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.892,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08737710190825797
    },
    "sha256": "cd118cccddc7ccd04fe5b19f0cae44c78382adccd7866d5eb6a8031d65d1c447",
    "simhash": "1:c4852d97cd3eb3ec",
    "word_count": 764
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:39:29.978535+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "In re Application of Alfred R. Pelt"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ORDER\nPoch, J.\nThis claim arises out of an incident that occurred on September 13, 1990. Alfred R. Pelt, Claimant, seeks compensation pursuant to the provisions of the Crime Victims Compensation Act, hereafter referred to as the Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 70, par. 71 et seq.\nThis Court has carefully considered the application for benefits submitted on February 13,1991, on the form prescribed by the Attorney General, 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:\n1. That on September 13, 1990, the Claimant was injured as a result of a traffic accident. The incident occurred at the intersection of 146th and Halsted Streets, Harvey, Illinois. Police investigation revealed that the Claimant\u2019s motorcycle was traveling northbound when it was struck by the offender\u2019s vehicle. The offender was issued a traffic citation for failure to yield the right-of-way. No criminal charges were filed against him.\n2. That in order for a Claimant to be eligible for compensation under the Act, there must be evidence that one of the violent crimes specifically set forth under section 72(c) of the Act occurred.\n3. That \u201ccrime of violence\u201d as specified in section 72(c) of the Act does not include any other offense or accident involving a motor vehicle except reckless homicide and driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic drugs.\n4. That the issue presented to the Court is whether the Claimant\u2019s injury that was caused by the offender\u2019s operation of a motor vehicle is compensable under section 72(c) of the Act.\n5. That as the Court stated in In re Application of Hansen (1980), 34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 401,\n\u201cThe Court has uniformly taken the position that the Illinois Crime Victims Compensation Act is not applicable to unintentional motor vehicle offenses, as not being a \u2018crime of violence\u2019 within \u00a72(c) thereof.\u201d\nSee also In re Desir (1980), 34 Ill. Ct. Cl. 391; In re Stevens (1976), 31 Ill. Ct. Cl. 710.\n6. That this claim does not meet required conditions precedent for compensation under the Act.\nIt is hereby ordered that this claim be, and is hereby, denied.\nOPINION\nPoch, J.\nThis claim arises out of an incident that occurred on September 13,1990. Alfred R. Pelt, the Claimant, seeks compensation pursuant to the provisions of the Crime Victims Compensation Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1989, ch. 70, par. 71 et seq.\nThe Court had previously denied the claim based upon the application for benefits submitted by the Claimant and upon the investigatory report of the Attorney General. The Court had found that the Claimant was not a victim of a violent crime as defined in section 72(c) of the Act.\nThe Claimant requested a hearing and the claim was assigned to a commissioner of the Court for a hearing. At the hearing the Claimant testified he was operating a motorcycle at 8:00 a.m. on September 13, 1990. He was travelling north on Halsted Street at 146th Street in Chicago when he was struck by an automobile, causing several personal injuries and damage to the motorcycle. The Claimant did not know if the other driver was intoxicated. The other driver was charged with failure to yield a right-of-way. The evidence showed that the other driver was not charged with any other criminal charges and that the police report indicated the other driver appeared \u201cnormal.\u201d\nIn order for a claimant to be eligible for compensation under the Act, there must be evidence that one of the violent crimes enumerated in section 72(c) of the Act occurred. That section does not include a motor vehicle accident as a \u201ccrime of violence\u201d unless it involves a reckless homicide offense or driving under the infuence of intoxicating liquor or narcotic drugs.\nThere was no evidence that the Claimant\u2019s injuries were caused by a driver operating the vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Since the Claimant\u2019s injuries were not caused by the operation while intoxicated, the matter is not compensable under section 72(c) of the Act.\nThis claim does not meet the required conditions precedent for compensation under the Act.\nIt is hereby ordered that this claim be and is hereby denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Poch, J. Poch, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Alfred R. Pelt, pro se, for Claimant.",
      "Roland W. Burris, Attorney General (James Maher, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 91-CV-1716\nIn re Application of Alfred R. Pelt\nOrder filed June 19, 1991.\nOpinion filed April 7, 1992.\nAlfred R. Pelt, pro se, for Claimant.\nRoland W. Burris, Attorney General (James Maher, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), for Respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0500-01",
  "first_page_order": 608,
  "last_page_order": 611
}