In the News
Cousins v. RDHR InvestmentsFebruary 9, 2017
Jordan Dunlop was successful in defending a fast food chain restaurant in a lawsuit brought by a plaintiff who claimed she injured her tooth when she bit into metal debris found in a pita. Although the plaintiff was treated for a chipped tooth following the alleged incident, the jury found that the restaurant was not liable.
Iannarella v. CorbettFebruary 9, 2017
David Zuber and Crystal Gillis were recently successful in appealing a Master’s decision to award the defendants a further defence medical with a new orthopedic expert. The Appeal judge found that there was no evidentiary basis to support the Master’s findings of fact, such that there was a palpable and overriding error.
Arteaga v. PoirierNovember 4, 2016
At the conclusion of trial conducted by Joseph Villeneuve and Agatha Dix for the defendants, with jury verdict given, the plaintiff moved for Judgment for $2,000 as the sole amount to be paid by the defendants net of deductible for general damages which reduced that award to zero, and reduction of special damages for collateral benefits received. The defendants opposed the motion on the basis that the net amount must be zero with the $2,000 reduced by deductibility of housekeeping benefits received by the plaintiff via statutory accident benefits. The defendants further argued their entitlement to costs as based on net award of zero, while the plaintiff argued entitlement to her costs based on net award of $2,000. The defendants as represented by Jonathan Schwartzman and Agatha Dix, were successful on the deductibility issue thereby resulting in a Judgment dismissing the action, with costs ordered payable to the defendants in the amount of $138,416.42.
RBC Insurance v. FieldNovember 1, 2016
Dan Fiorita was recently successful in obtaining judgement in favour of an Insurer recovering payments for accident benefits and property loss that were wrongfully paid due to the claimant’s wilful misrepresentation and fraudulent conduct. Punitive damages were also awarded against the claimant.
1791949 Ontario Limited ats DaigneaultNovember 1, 2016
David Zuber recently responded to an appeal of an Order requiring a plaintiff who split his time between Quebec and Florida to post substantial security for costs. Mr. Zuber was successful and the plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed with costs.
Chrysler Financial ats GrahamNovember 1, 2016
David Zuber was successful in defending CorePointe Insurance and Daimler Chrysler Financial Services against a lawsuit brought by an injured passenger who claimed that Daimler Chrysler was responsible as the lessor of the defendant vehicle and CorePointe had to indemnify the underinsured defendant driver. This case upheld the Insurance Act amendments, section 267.12(1) that limit the liability of leasing companies and their insurers to $1 million. Leave to the Supreme Court of Canada was sought by the plaintiffs but was dismissed.
Arteaga v Poirier, 2016 ONSC 3712 (CanLII)June 9, 2016
Joseph Villeneuve and Agatha Dix successfully defended a motor vehicle accident claim deemed by the judge to meet the statutory threshold, by securing a net zero judgment from the jury.
Muzzin v. Miniature World Day Care Inc.,  O.J. No. 2754 (S.C.J.)June 9, 2016
Waheeda Ekhlas Smith successfully argued a motion where the plaintiff refused to produce a current employment file, despite claiming ongoing impairments which substantially interfere with her employment, ongoing and future loss of income, loss of competitive advantage, and a decrease in employability. An order was made for the production of the employment file with costs.
Graham v. Lemay, 2016 ONCA 55January 27, 2016
David Zuber recently responded to an appeal and cross-appeal on the issue of entitlement to a cap on liability. Mr. Zuber was successful in his submissions and the appeals were denied.
Ibarra v. IbrahimJanuary 8, 2016
Eric Zadro recently obtained a precedent-setting decision permitting a solicitor to act for the insured as a statutory third party after the solicitor had gone off record for the subject insured. This overturns an earlier decision of the Superior Court which states that in such cases a conflict of interest would arise.