skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 98582 Find in a Library
Title: Theoretical and Practical Impact of Private Insurance on Restitution as a Sanction for Criminal Offenders
Author(s): H F Feinman
Corporate Author: Institute of Policy Analysis
United States of America
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 23
Sponsoring Agency: Institute of Policy Analysis
Eugene, OR 97401
National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
US Dept of Justice
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 79-JN-AX-0009
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper explores legal issues involved in paying restitution to insurance companies that have compensated crime victims for losses suffered from a crime, focusing on legal issues in the insurance company's interaction with the victim, the offender, and the courts.
Abstract: Appellate courts have generally ruled that the insured (victim) is to be reimbursed by restitution of losses not covered by insurance; the insurer is then entitled to the remaining balance up to the amount paid out on the claim. In some jurisdictions, the insurer is entitled to reimbursement out of the recovery from the third party (offender), and the insured (victim) is entitled to any remaining balance. In other jurisdictions, the recovery from the offender is to be prorated between the insurer and the insured in accordance with the percentage of the original loss paid by the insurer under the policy. Courts in some States, however, will not order restitution payments to insurance companies for various legal and philosophical reasons. Regarding legal issues in the insurance company's interaction with the offender, it is possible under subrogation law that the offender could be liable for civil damages to the insurance company. There is no statutory scheme which gives a crime victim or an insurance company a right to receive restitution from an offender. Appellate courts have reached different conclusions on the issue of whether a court may order an offender to pay restitution to an insurance company. The concluding section of the paper discusses whether restitution is less likely to achieve the goals of punishmen, rehabilitation, and compensation if restitution payments are made to insurance companies rather than directly to victims. Twenty-two footnotes are provided.
Index Term(s): Crime insurance; Restitution; State laws
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=98582

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.