On Feb. 1, the Ontario Human Rights Commission released a policy statement on medical documentation that is needed when disability-related accommodation requests are made. The policy statement refers to the OHRC’s updated policy on the duty to accommodate disabilities and protect the disabled against discrimination that was released last year, noting the role of medical professionals in the accommodation process and the type and scope of medical information needed to give employers.
Author Archives: Admin4
Drone operators risk lawsuits, criminal charges for privacy breaches: OIAA speaker
The new tort of intrusion upon seclusion is “a big deal for drone operators,” and experts on operating drones will be “key to helping a court” determine the standard of care in negligence lawsuits, a lawyer suggested at a recent conference.
Looking out for pedestrians
This past year, Toronto experienced the highest pedestrian death rate in over a decade. While alarm bells should have been sounding a long time ago, civil exposure against the city and province is increasing day by day.
http://lawyersweekly.ca/
As Sleep Improves, So Does An Injured Brain
A study of 30 patients hospitalized for moderate to severe traumatic brain injuries found that sleep quality and brain function improved in tandem, researchers reported Wednesday
http://www.npr.org/sections/he
Car Accidents – Suing the Other Driver
If you have been injured in an auto accident, you will be entitled to seek accident benefits from your own insurer under the no-fault provisions of the Ontario automobile legislation
https://techfeatured.com/autom
Not paralyzed enough: N.S. man sues to be recognized as paraplegic after insurance claim denied
In the summer of 2011, Mitchell Murphy of Nova Scotia was about to start his final year of university in Cleveland when he suffered a terrible accident.
Lyrica and Cymbalta Advised for Diabetic Neuropathy
Nearly 26 million people in the United States have diabetes and over half have some form of neuropathy, which often causes a painful stinging or burning sensation in the hands or feet. Nerve pain is often the first symptom that prompts people to seek medical care before getting a diabetes diagnosis.
ABI Recovery Magazine (Winter Issue 2017)
ABI Recovery Magazine is a quaterly online eZine serving the traumatic acquired brain injury community of Canada. eSubscription is FREE! Readership includes brain injury survivors and family, Caregivers, non-profit groups & associations, professionals in TBI ABI fields.
https://issuu.com/debbiest.jea
OPSEU says Basic Income Pilot must not delay action on poverty
“There is nothing wrong with studying new ways to deliver income supports,” Warren (Smokey) Thomas said today. “The problem is, people are homeless now. Children are hungry now. Ontarians were homeless and hungry when the Liberals got elected in 2003, and they still are to this day.”
http://www.nupge.ca/content/13
Bodenstein v Penley, 2017 ONSC 27 (CanLII)
[9] The positions of the parties are, briefly, as follows. According to the plaintiffs, there was no evidentiary foundation for the jury to conclude that there was no liability. No other event or person intervened which caused the accident. Only Mr. Bodenstein and Ms. Penley were involved. The jury failed to heed the trial judge’s instructions which were that if they were unable to decide on an apportionment of liability that they apportion it 50/50. There was no evidence presented which would support the jury’s verdict and it therefore must be set aside.
[10] The defence position is that the jury was properly instructed on the onus of proof. The jury determined that neither party met the onus of proof to show the other was at fault. Further, Ms. Penley had no memory of what occurred and Mrs. Bodenstein was looking down when the accident occurred. The only real evidence of what occurred was from Ms. Polhamus who did not attribute fault to Ms. Penley. That evidence was uncontradicted. There was also the evidence of Mr. Bodenstein who could only recall sitting at a red light and someone driving at him but nothing more. Further, there was the evidence of the debris trail from both vehicles which was in the middle of the intersection which did not align with what Mr. Bodenstein said occurred. The jury was instructed on all of the above evidence. The jury determined that there was insufficient evidence to determine what happened and as the finders of fact were entitled to conclude that there was no liability.
[19] As for the verdict lacking a foundation in law, I find that the jury was properly instructed on negligence and given various options. Based on the other answers given to questions posed to them in the verdict sheets, they clearly understood their role and their instructions. This is not a case where the jury simply “opted out” of making a decision. The evidence of what happened at the scene of the accident was clearly contradictory. However, unlike in the Gauthier decision cited above, they did not attempt to impose some form of unrealistic division of responsibility. They were unable to find that either party was negligent based on the evidence that was available to them. In my view, they followed their instructions properly in finding no negligence where, based on their finding of the facts and in consideration of the respective burdens of proof, no negligence was possible.
[20] Based on all of the above, the plaintiffs’ motion is dismissed. Counsel shall contact my assistant Robyn Pope at Robyn.Pope@ontario.ca to set up a conference call to deal with next steps and costs of this motion.