to S.C. Reporter 5/23/17
DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE
R. Borchert Magistrate JUDGE.
On March 16, 2015, applicant, Alan Cannon, filed a
compensation application as the result of an assault which
occurred on December 20, 2014. On June 15, 2015, the Attorney
General issued a finding of fact and decision determining
that applicant qualified as a victim of criminally injurious
conduct pursuant to R.C. 2743.51(C)(1). Applicant was granted
an award in the amount of $50.49 for work loss and mileage
expenses incurred. Applicant's claim for replacement
services loss was denied.
On June 25, 2015, applicant submitted a request for
reconsideration contending he incurred additional work loss.
On August 21, 2015, the Attorney General rendered a Final
Decision finding no reason to modify his initial decision
since applicant failed to submit documentation to prove
additional work loss was incurred. On September 15, 2015,
applicant filed a notice of appeal from the August 21, 2015
Final Decision of the Attorney General.
Hence, a hearing was held before this magistrate on January
11, 2016 at 11:00 a.m.
Applicant, Alan Cannon, appeared via telephone while his
attorney, Matthew Shaughnessy appeared in person. The state
of Ohio was represented by Assistant Attorney General Yan
Chen and Associate Assistant Attorney General Lauren Angell.
Initially, it was noted that two motions were pending and
arguments were requested concerning those motions. The first
motion concerning applicant, Alan Cannon, being allowed to
appear and testify via telephone and the second motion would
allow applicant's witness Aleshondo Ellis to testify via
telephone. The Attorney General filed a motion contra to
applicant's motion stating that Aleshondo Ellis,
applicant's cousin "does not have the credentials to
testify to the nature and extent of the applicant's
injuries or to their effect on his ability to work."
Applicant stated Aleshondo Ellis will testify to Alan
Cannon's physical abilities after the criminal incident.
While Mr. Ellis is not an expert, he can offer his
observations of the applicant's physical condition. The
Attorney General objected since the uncorroborated statements
of an applicant are insufficient to prove an element of the
claim. The same rationale should apply to the testimony of
Mr. Ellis since he is related to applicant, his testimony
would be bias, and he has no background to testify concerning
Applicant's first motion to allow the telephone
appearance and testimony of the applicant is granted.
The rules of evidence do not apply to proceedings before this
court. Hearsay may be presented and it will be given weight
based on its probative value. In re Grow, 7 Ohio
Misc.2d 26, 454 N.E.2d 618 (Ct. of Cl. 1983). Accordingly, I
grant applicant's motion to allow Mr. Ellis to testify
via telephone and will give the testimony the weight it
deserves. Attorney General's motion contra is denied.
The Attorney General made a motion to submit additional
medical documentation received after the transmission of the
file. Applicant had no objection and the additional records
were submitted into evidence.
Applicant made a motion to submit general information
concerning rib fractures into evidence. The Attorney General
objected since the medical documentation did not reveal
applicant suffered fractures to his ribs. Applicant's
motion to introduce general rib fracture information was
granted with the caveat that applicant must prove Mr. Cannon
suffered a rib fracture or the information is not relevant.
Applicant related this appeal concerns Mr. Cannon's claim
for work loss. He was granted work loss for three days of
missed work while he contended he missed between five to six
weeks of work. However, applicant pointed out that Mr. Cannon
was injured on a Friday and was only granted work loss for
that Monday. Applicant contended that Mr. Cannon's
injuries were serious, however, due to lack of health
insurance he was unable to go to a doctor to establish he
incurred additional work loss. Applicant contended rib
injuries take between five to six weeks to heal so it would
be reasonable to grant Mr. Cannon additional work loss.
The Attorney General countered that Mr. Cannon's injuries
consisted of rib contusion and x-rays confirmed there were no
fractures. The Attorney General awarded three days of work
loss, the amount of time that can be taken off without a
doctor's excuse. However, since the first two days fell
on a Saturday and Sunday, work loss was only awarded for that
Monday. The Attorney General countered that Mr. Cannon could
have followed up with additional medical care since he was
eligible to receive ...