Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Costs and fees – These may include court costs, fees for supervision, payments for legal representation. They are imposed to help reimburse the state for costs incurred. Restitution – Victims may be awarded payments as a way to compensate them for losses, either through direct payments for individuals or through payments into a general fund ...
Restitution often involves replacement of stolen or damaged property or reimbursement of costs that the victim incurred as a result of the crime. A court is required under current state law to order full restitution unless it finds compelling and extraordinary reasons not to do so. [38] Sometimes, however, judges do not order restitution.
Restitution and unjust enrichment is the field of law relating to gains-based recovery. In contrast with damages (the law of compensation), restitution is a claim or remedy requiring a defendant to give up benefits wrongfully obtained. Liability for restitution is primarily governed by the "principle of unjust enrichment": A person who has been ...
Ohio will only restore your driving privileges once you pay all fees assessed by the court and provide proof of insurance. If the state finds that you have violated the license suspension, it will ...
Aug. 31—A former business owner accused of failing to pay state sales tax in an effort "to keep the business open" pleaded guilty in Cumberland County Criminal Court earlier this month and is ...
R. Kelly and Universal Music Group will have to pay over $500,000 in music royalties to Brooklyn federal prosecutors to help pay for his victim’s restitution and criminal fines. The company is ...
Although this may seem a simple matter of trespass with an unavoidable fine, it may amount to a case of implied contract (i.e. "if you park here, you agree to pay a penalty"); and such a "penalty" (read "damages") must be proportionate or else the fine will be void. Also, since the penalty notice could have been attached to the windscreen, the ...
The late Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court Thomas J. Moyer pointed out that the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that there is an unconstitutional conflict of interest for a mayor to levy a fine paid into a budget that the mayor himself controls. [2]