Stanley Johnson, a water softener installer, slipped and fell on ice that had accumulated on the lower portion of a driveway – the apron – on a residential street in Newmarket. Mr. Johnson’s prior lawyer mistakenly released the Town from the action, unaware that the apron was within the road allowance and Newmarket’s responsibility.

To prove the case against the lawyer, we had to prove the case against the municipality as well, which included distinguishing a Court of Appeal decision that found a Town had no obligation to clear the apron of driveways. The defendant’s lawyer made a “zero” offer.

Through the evidence of homeowners and a climatologist, we established that the ice had persisted for at least five days. We exposed that Newmarket had received complaints about the state of its sidewalks and made empty promises to residents that it would take action, all the while having a policy of not clearing sidewalks.

The court determined that Newmarket was responsible for the apron and owed Mr. Johnson a duty of care, and by extension, that the predecessor lawyer was negligent for releasing the Town. No fault was found against Mr. Johnson, and he was awarded full compensation for his injuries.

The post Johnson v. Lewin appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Tim was a union glazier who was T-boned at an intersection. He suffered soft-tissue injuries to his neck that prevented him from returning to his job, hanging large glass panels on skyscrapers. With the opinion of a neuro-surgeon, the defendant argued that his inability to work was due to a preexisting condition, spinal stenosis, of which Mr. Nairn was unaware but was visible on diagnostic imaging.

After hearing from an expert orthopaedic surgeon at trial and from people who knew Mr. Nairn best, both before and after the accident, the jury awarded enough compensation to replace his inability to work and to compensate him for his pension losses.

The post Nairn v. Merlino appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Helen fractured her elbow while walking through a grocery store parking lot. She slipped and fell on an icy concrete island beside a wheelchair accessible parking space.

The value of Helen’s claim was agreed upon by the parties. Still, the defendant property owner and maintenance contractor did not accept any responsibility for the accident. They did not make any offer to settle. It was their position that Helen was 100% to blame. They came to a secret agreement to join forces against Helen. She had no choice but to concede or fight at trial. Helen chose to fight.

Through the trial, we established that the property owner’s contractor’s records were made-up and that the engineer’s reconstruction was critically flawed and misrepresentative of the work that was actually performed.

The jury found the property owner 50% at-fault, the contractor 40% at-fault, and Helen 10% at-fault.

The post Elder v. Rizzardo Bros Holdings Inc. appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Gloria was an employee of The Bay at the Georgian Mall in Barrie. After her shift, she exited the mall and slipped on ice that had formed on the sidewalk. The defendants argued that Gloria’s boots were the cause of her fall, as was her inattention.

We hired an expert tribometrist to measure the level of friction created between Gloria’s rubber-soled boots to show they were of no consequence. We focused on a leak coming from the mall’s roof, which it knew about, and was the cause of the ice.

Gloria sustained multiple complicated ankle fractures, which required surgery and extensive treatment. Her injuries were so severe that they eventually took her out of the workforce entirely.

The jury determined that the Georgian Mall was 90% responsible for the accident and returned a verdict that was more than double the amount that the defendants offered to settle for before trial.

The post Derry v. C.F. Realty Holdings appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

This case involved a young boy who was viciously attacked by a dog and bitten about his face and neck. Sadly, the child was physically and psychologically scarred from the event. The challenge in the case was establishing the impact the emotional damage would have on his ability to earn income in the future.

Following the trial, the court awarded the child $920,000 for the young boy’s losses.

The post J. v. Jocko appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

We represented a pedestrian, Nancy, who was walking in a crosswalk when an inattentive truck driver struck her. As a result of the accident, Nancy suffered a significant fracture of her left tibia and fibula, which required emergent surgery and three additional surgeries, including a fusion. It was expected that she would require an additional three surgeries throughout her lifetime.

Nancy returned to her administrative job because she loved what she did, but she struggled with pain. The defendant’s insurer refused to acknowledge that she would ever have a loss of income. We proceeded to trial. We called on Nancy’s treating orthopaedic surgeon and family doctor to testify to her ongoing limitations, and we flew an independent witness in from Texas to tell the jury about the severity of the impact.

The jury returned a verdict awarding Nancy enough compensation to allow her to work significantly reduced hours until her retirement.

The post Barbeau v. Ruchetta appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Lorne Taylor suffered 2nd and 3rd degree burns to his shoulder and arm when he fell into a 10’ wide and 3’ deep bonfire pit in the backyard of a rental property. No police or ambulance was called to the scene. The property owners concealed the bonfire pit and amassed statements from every guest that the incident happened at someone else’s property. They later sold their property, which was bulldozed for the Highway 404 extension.

We secured permits from the provincial government and conducted a forensic excavation, locating the concealed bonfire pit. We proceeded to trial against the tenant who threw the party and the landlord who built the pit. Justice Marchand found liability against the tenant but not against the landlord, who made the pit but attempted to contract out of any responsibility for it.

We proceeded to the Court of Appeal, which reversed the trial decision and found liability against the landlord. The Court of Appeal established that a landlord could not contract out of his/her duty to keep the property safe.

The post Taylor v. Allard appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Bill Gorman was injured in three separate collisions under three different insurance compensation regimes. The trial was complex and pitted Bill against three defence lawyers.

Bill was fortunate enough to have a brother, John Gorman Q.C., who was himself a personal injury lawyer of 30 years and a former senior crown prosecutor. John referred his brother to Tim Boland. Go to bolandromaine.com to hear John tell you why he hired Tim and what factors are essential to consider when hiring a personal injury lawyer.

Following a lengthy trial in North Bay, the court recognized Bill’s injuries and awarded him the highest award for chronic pain in the country up to that point. The defendants appealed. The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the trial decision.

The post Gorman v. Falardeau appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Hit the brake – Swerve left – Dump the bike! These were the split-second decisions Ron made as a van pulled out from a stop sign, turned right, then left across Ron’s path, at an off-set intersection. Ron went into the side of the van and was dragged 50’ across the road. The van driver was charged but acquitted at traffic court.

After the traffic court decision, Ron came to us. He had severe orthopaedic injuries that ended his career as a produce manager.

Following a month-long trial, the jury found the van’s driver to be 90% at-fault for the collision and awarded Ron enough compensation to fund his future care needs and replace the income he lost by having to retire early.

The post Cockburn v. Holmes appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.

Tim represented a snowmobile driver, Rob Jones, who was driving along a remote roadside when he was struck by an oncoming motorist who had crested a hill and sent Rob into a tree. The police charged Rob.

Rob fractured his lumbar spine, which required fusion surgery and Harrington rods. Tim represented him at Provincial Offences Court, where he was acquitted.

We then represented him in his civil action and took his case to trial. The other motorist was found 75% at-fault for travelling at an excessive speed and not keeping to the right side of the road. As an autobody mechanic, Rob relied on his physical wellbeing to earn his livelihood. The court awarded him compensation to reflect the negative impact his injuries would have on his ability to continue working as an autobody mechanic for the remainder of his career.

The post Jones v. Ross appeared first on Boland Romaine LLP.