Sometimes justice can’t be negotiated. Insurers know which lawyers go to trial for their clients and which ones don’t. Shouldn’t you? A strong trial record is one of the most important factors in keeping cases out of court: it informs insurers that their risk of going to trial is real, and discourages discounted offers.
Because so few cases go to trial, verdicts offer an objective and rare insight into the judgment, confidence, knowledge and ability of your lawyer. Settlements can’t give you that insight. They don’t tell you how much the client compromised.
We are very proud of our trial record. We have taken the following types of cases to trial:
Successful trials in relation to the following injuries:
Successful trials in relation to the following types of accidents:
APPEALS AND OTHER SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS
Trial Summary: Zacharias v. Zurich Insurance Company
Ms. Zacharias suffered various soft tissue and related injuries, including thoracic outlet syndrome in a car crash that took place on December 18, 1990. Due to these injuries she had to cease her satisfying career as a flight attendant and was unable to return to work after that crash. As a result of her inability to work from the crash she applied for and received income replacement benefits from her accident benefit insurer Zurich Insurance Company (“Zurich”) under the no fault scheme in place at the time, the Ontario Motorist Protection Plan (the “OMPP”).
read moreTrial Summary: Silveira v. Her Majesty the Queen
The plaintiff, Ms. Silveira, was injured on December 12, 2004 when her vehicle lost traction on winter roads, crossed the centre line and collided head-on with another vehicle. All occupants of both vehicles were injured. A child died in the on-coming car. Ms. Silveira suffered a lower extremity fracture and brain injury.
read moreSAMPLE TRIAL DECISIONS
Trial Summary: Pelletier v. Ontario Provincial Police et al.
This judge alone trial occurred over 22 days before Boswell J. It was as complex as can be. It involved issues of credibility, liability, competing medical diagnoses and prognoses, pre-accident and post-accident drug addiction, psychological issues, causation, future care costs, life expectancy, Catastrophic Impairment under the Statutory Accident Benefit Schedules and issues of set-off. Regarding damages, Justice Boswell stated the following in paragraph two:
read moreTrial Summary: Ziebenhaus v. Bahlieda
This case involved a brain-injured youth who had been injured in a skiing accident as part of a school trip. Liability was challenging as it dealt with school supervision policies, ski hill testing protocols, waivers, terrain park design, and human perception factors. The damages section was equally challenging as the youth suffered a mild traumatic brain injury that did not appear to affect his intellect, but did affect his behavior and judgment.
read moreTrial Summary: Green et. Al. v State Farm
Ms. Green and Mr. Van Eik were common law spouses who were injured in a car crash in Florida in November of 2002.
read moreTrial Summary: Taylor v. Allard et al.
This trial, and appeal, were primarily fought over the issue of liability. On July 29, 1995, the plaintiff, Lorne Taylor, was an uninvited guest at a backyard party.
read moreTrial Summary: Campeau, Raymond Inquest
Raymond Campeau was killed in a mining accident on March 25, 2006. Mr. Campeau was an experienced and well-respected miner who left behind a wife and two children.
read moreTrial Summary: Thornhill v. Shadid et al.
This 15-day trial, before Howden J. was the first case to succeed against a municipality that relied upon O. Reg 239/02 as a defence, The Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways (“MMS”).
read moreTrial Summary: Goff v. Kyte, EG et al.
The trial of this action involved a serious single motor vehicle accident which occurred on July 9, 1992. The trial was heard over 17 days before Justice Shaughnessy.
read moreTell Us Why Your Future Is Worth Fighting For