Z uber & Company LLP specializes exclusively in civil litigation, primarily in the areas of property and casualty insurance law in addition to personal injury litigation.
From the firm's inception in February 1999 with just a handful of staff, we have grown to over 65 people while retaining an informal, boutique-style atmosphere.
Our client base ranges from private individuals to major insurance companies situated across North America. We have extensive experience conducting successful mediations and arbitrations as well as trials and appeals. We are listed in Best's Directories of Recommended Insurance Attorneys.
Meet the Lawyers
Jennifer S. Barnes
James G. Norton
Karim N. Hirani
This is a case where the Plaintiff was violently assaulted at an enclosed ATM at night. The Plaintiff made a number of allegations against TD Canada Trust including breaching their duty of care for the Plaintiff’s safety. The Defendant TD Canada Trust brought a summary judgment motion where a voir dire of the experts was conducted regarding qualifications and their opinion evidence. After a detailed analysis of the admissibility of expert reports and the evidence, the Court found that TD Canada Trust did not beach its duty of care to the Plaintiff.
In March and April of this year, Mr. Tobin Horton and Mr. Dean Paspalofski represented the Defendants in one of the few virtual civil trials in the Province, in front of Madam Justice Mills, sitting in Milton, Ontario. The matter arose as a result of an unusual motor vehicle incident where the Plaintiff alleged to have suffered permanent and life altering injuries as a result of electrocution and a traumatic brain injury.
The nine day trial was heard over a three week period and the Defendants were ultimately successful at the trial, having the Plaintiff’s action dismissed by the court.
A copy of the Reasons for the Decision of Justice Mills can be found here:Date: September 16, 2021
Click here to read more
Jonathan Schwartzman was successful on a LAT hearing held by video-conference on a challenging causation case of a high-speed rollover of a delivery truck which caused only soft tissue injuries to the claimant driver, and did not cause or contribute to the disc herniation he suffered 3 months later, or his alleged chronic pain syndrome and alleged psychological condition. The Applicant did not meet his onus on proving causation, nor on his alleged extent of impairment, for pre and post-104 week Income Replacement Benefits or for disputed treatment, and his claim for an award under S.10 of Reg.664/90 was similarly dismissed.