Thursday, September 9, 2010

Valid & Complete Settlement Agreement Between Victim and Criminal Defendant of Economic Loss Precludes Restitution.

image State v. Arends, Minn.Ct.App., 8/10/10.  Ms. Arends used her employer’s credit card for her own personal use.  When she got caught two things happened.  The state charged her with theft by swindle; and she and her employer sued each other, she for wrongful termination, the employer for embezzlement.  Ms. Arends and her employer negotiated a settlement under which the two agreed that she didn’t have to pay back a single dime to her employer, and her employer didn’t have to pay a single dime for the alleged wrongful termination.  The state thought this was way too easy and wanted Ms. Arends to have to pay restitution as part of the criminal sentence.

The appellate court spends three fourths of the opinion debating whether it should consider this certified question.  After all that ink they decided to answer the question.  It seems pretty obvious.  The terms of the settlement agreement established the employer’s uncompensated loss at zero.  Absent proof that the agreement was fraudulent, incomplete or otherwise invalid then the state is precluded from seeking restitution. 

No comments:

Post a Comment