 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Newburn v. RFB Petroleum Inc.5/18/1989
property damages to two hundred and fifty dollars); § 24-4.1-109(2)(b), C.R.S. (1988 Repl. Vol. 10A) (limits aggregate damages to ten thousand dollars). Further, such statutes typically exclude certain losses. Thus, property damage, as well as pain and suffering may be excluded as compensable losses. See § 24-4.1-109, C.R.S. (1988 Repl. Vol. 10A).
Unlike a victim's reparation law, 18 U.S.C. § 3651 does not create a state-financed program of compensation to crime victims or other eligible persons. Rather, it gives a federal court authority to order a defendant, as a condition of probation, to pay restitution to the victim of his criminal conduct. And, unlike an award under a victim's reparation law, such an order of restitution is not a grant of governmental funds to compensate a claimant for losses caused by crime. Rather, it is remedial and punitive measure imposed against a convicted criminal in favor of the victim directly affected by the criminal activity.
These distinctions lead us to conclude that the funds at issue here are not within the scope of the garnishment exemption contained in § 13-54-102(a)(q). Accordingly, we agree with the ruling of the trial court.
In view of our conclusion that the funds are not exempt as property traceable to an award under a victim's reparation law, we deem it unnecessary to determine whether a corporate debtor is entitled to such an exemption.
We reject the judgment debtors' contentions that plaintiff's judgment was not entered against the corporation or that any judgment entered against the corporation was void because of the corporation's alleged insolvency. Our review of the record satisfied us that neither of these arguments is supported by the law or by the evidence presented to the trial court.
The order is affirmed.
JUDGE PIERCE and JUDGE TURSI concur.
|