-
Nguyen v. SSQMr. Nguyen, who did not speak English, was unaware of his potential entitlement to long-term disability benefits from SSQ Life Insurance. When he learned that he was eligible for benefits he applied but his application was 2 ½ years late. It was denied by the Defendant on the basis that he was out of time to apply for benefits.
The Defendant brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the action against it. The Court dismissed the motion and granted Mr. Nguyen relief for forfeiture ruling that his application for disability benefits was timely. His claim was ultimately accepted and it settled for the full policy value at a pre-trial.
-
Batoor v. State FarmMr. Batoor was catastrophically injured in a single vehicle motorcycle accident. State Farm Insurance refused to pay him an income replacement benefit on the basis that he was knowingly operating a motorcycle without insurance. State Farm had alleged that Mr. Batoor had purchased the motorcycle that day and ought to have known it was not insured. Mr. Batoor denied that he purchased the motorcycle and that he operated it without insurance. The FSCO arbitrator agreed with Mr. Batoor’s position and held that he was eligible for income replacement benefits from State Farm Insurance. -
MacPherson v. SamuelThis case involves Mr. MacPherson falling off the roof of Ms. Samuel’s home in the course of assisting a friend with a roofing job. He sustained a significant back injury and was permanently disabled. An action was brought against Ms. Samuel, the homeowner, as well as another roofing contractor, who was assisting on the roofing job. The Defendants both brought summary judgment motions to dismiss the Plaintiff’s case alleging that he had no cause of action against them in law. Both motions were dismissed by the Court thereby preserving the right of Mr. MacPherson to proceed to trial. -
Morin v. KorkolaThis is a medical malpractice trial decision..
It was a 10 day non-jury trial against an orthopaedic surgeon who had failed to provide appropriate post-surgical care for a fractured femur. As a result, the plaintiff required additional surgery, an osteotomy. and developed a chronic deep-seated bone infection. The plaintiff was successful in establishing that the defendant surgeon failed to meet the required standard of care and that his negligence caused the plaintiff's damages. The plaintiff recovered approximately $350,000.00 in damages inclusive of pre-judgment interest plus costs.
-
Mariano v. TTCThis case involves a man who tripped and fell after exiting a bus.
He felt as a result of a bump in the road and sustained a serious head injury. A claim was advanced against the Toronto Transit Commission for statutory accident benefits on the basis that his accident arose out of the use of a motor vehicle. He was successful at arbitration and the decision was upheld on appeal.
-
DonovanThis case involved a claim for death benefits under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.
The claimant's husband died of asphyxiation and his death was ruled a suicide by both the coroner and the police. We succeeded on appeal in having his death declared an accident and obtained significant death benefits for his surviving spouse and family.
-
Stafford v. AdamsThis case included an action against the Toronto Police Services Board for injuries arising out of a high-speed police chase. In this motion the plaintiff sought to obtain the investigation file from the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) relating to their investigation of the police chase. The Attorney General acting on behalf of the SIU refused to provide a copy of the file. On motion the plaintiff obtained a copy of the SIU file.
-
Nguyet v. HertzThe plaintiff was seriously injured by a woman who struck her with her rental car and attempted to flee the scene of the accident. An action was advanced against the driver and the owner of the car for damages including punitive damages. The rental company sought to dismiss the punitive damage claim. In a precedent setting decision the court upheld the punitive damage claim against the rental car company solely on the basis that the rental car company owned the vehicle.
-
Korczynski v. BarraganThis case involved a settlement of a tort action on behalf of an incompetent person. We were retained and brought court proceedings to set aside the settlement on the basis that the plaintiff was mentally incompetent at the time of the settlement, although there was no medical evidence of incompetency.
The court agreed with our position and the plaintiff was permitted to reopen his action against the driver which had been purportedly settled five years earlier.
-
Rudnicki v. CertasMrs. Rudnicki had already retained four lawyers prior to retaining our firm. Her income benefits had been terminated five years earlier by her insurer. The insurer refused to reconsider her income benefit claim on the basis that it was subject to a two year limitation period.
She succeeded at arbitration and on appeal in advancing her income benefit claim and the matter settled shortly thereafter for a significant sum.
Serving across Toronto, and the Greater Toronto Area