Fortune v. Crime Victims Compensation Board

I must respectfully dissent. My reading of the crime victims compensation act, MCL 18.351 et seq.; MSA 3.372(1) et seq., convinces me that the term "claimant” as used in the act is ambiguous and that, in view of the purpose of the Legislature in enacting the statute, it was intended that that term encompass all persons entitled to file a claim and receive benefits. Based on this conviction regarding Legislative intent, I conclude in this case that respondent, the Crime Victims Compensation Board, erred in limiting claimant and her minor children to an aggregate award of $15,000. Thus, I would…