In re Frank J. Reznar

This claim arises out a criminal offense that occurred January 4,1975, at 55th and Lawndale, Chicago, Illinois. Frank R. Reznar, the victim, seeks compensation pursuant to the provisions of the "Crime Victims Compensation Act," (Ill.Rev.Stat., Ch. 70, Pars. 71, et seq.), hereinafter "the Act."

This Court has carefully considered the application for benefits submitted on the form prescribed by the Court, the report of the Attorney General, and the testimony taken on February 28, 1977, before the Commissioner to whom the case was assigned hearing. Based upon the foregoing, the Court finds: [*739] 1. That the Claimant, Frank Reznar, age 32, was a victim of a violent crime, as defined in 2(c) of the Act, to wit: “Aggravated Battery,” as defined by Ill.Rev.Stat., 1973, Ch. 38, 12-4. 2. That on January 4, 1975, at approximately 3:OO a.m., while driving on Lawndale Avenue in the City of Chicago, Illinois, Claimant was “tailgated” for several blocks by another car. When Claimant reached the intersection of Lawndale and 55th Street, the traffic signal was red and he stopped. The driver of the other vehicle pulled around Claimant’s car at a diagonal, making it impossible for Claimant to proceed. Claimant got out of his car and said to the driver of the other car, “What is the matter with you, are you crazy or something?” Thereupon the driver of the other car and two passengers in the rear seat got out of the car and beat Claimant with hockey sticks and karate equipment. 3. That the act of Claimant in getting out of his car and addressing the driver of the other vehicle as he did was not “substantial provocation of his assailant” within the meaning of the Act. 4. That Claimant was taken to Holy Cross Hospital in Chicago, Illinois, for emergency treatment and lost two weeks of work. 5 . Claimant reported the incident to the police, but his assailants have never been apprehended. 6. That Claimant has complied with all pertinent provisions of the Act and qualifies for compensation thereunder. 7. That the Claimant seeks compensation for medical expenses and for loss of earnings. 8. That the sole medical expense incurred by Claimant without reimbursement therefor is the following: $15 Ralph H. Rusco, Jr., D.O. [*740] This course was heard before the Honorable Joseph P. Griffin, a Commissioner of this Court, following Claimant’s objection to the dpinion heretofore entered by this Court on July 6, 19764 denying the application for compensation. The sole contested issue presented to the Court is whether the conduct of the Claimant in giving chase to his assailants constituted “wrongful conduct” within the meaning of Section 3(f) of the Act.

It appears from the evidence introduced at the aforesaid hearing that on May 3, 1975, at about 2:OO a.m., Claimant was a passenger in an automobile being I

I

driven by one Donald Walsh. At approximately 74th Street and Southwest Highway certain youths in an automobile threw empty beer cans at the vehicle in which Claimant was riding. The driver of the automobile in which Claimant was riding, Donald Walsh, testified that he followed the offenders’ car to 94th Street and Sawyer Avenue, a distance of over two miles, for the purpose of obtaining their license number which he intended to give to the police department. He pulled up to the rear of the offending car when another car pulled in back of him sandwiching his car in between the two vehicles. From seven to nine youths emerged from the two vehicles and proceeded to beat Donald Walsh and the Claimant.

Claimant, William D. McNamara, called as witness, testified that he was hit and knocked to the street, and that he sustained an injury to his leg which later was determined to be a fracture.

The Court feels that Claimant, as a passenger in an automobile having no control over the driver, was not involved in a chase. The Court feels that the evidence introduced at the hearing does not show that the Claimant, William D. McNamara, was engaged in any wrongful act which contributed to his injury.

[*742] I

t Claimant seeks compensation for the time he lost from work. His hospital bills and any other expenses were paid for by his union’s insurance carrier. It has been determined that Claimant was off work fifteen (15) weeks. On the basis of the computation at $500.00 per month as per statute, the full amount he is entitled to recover is $1,875.00. Claimant received from his union the sum of $100.00 per week for a total of $1,500.00. The statutory deduction added to this provides a deduction of $1,700.00, so that the full amount to which Claimant is entitled is $175.00.

Claimant is therefore awarded the sum of $175.00.

Claimant has filed suit against William J. Pisano, the driver of the second vehicle involved in this matter, and this suit is presently pending in the Circuit Court of Cook County, No. 75 L 12304. The Respondent, State of Illinois, is subrogated in the amount of $175.00 against any recovery in said suit.