Carly Baetz began to notice something was wrong with her when working on a particularly difficult case. As a staff attorney with a juvenile rights practice at the Legal Aid Society in New York, she was no stranger to heart-wrenching cases of child abuse, but this one really got to her.
Author Archives: Admin2
Petition to the Government of Canada
We, the undersigned, Citizens of Canada, call upon the Government of Canada to implement a National Disability Assistance Program for Canadians with chronic disabilities to fund life-sustaining medical equipment and to provide access to the necessary services to allow them to optimize their functionality over the course of their lifetime.
https://petitions.parl.gc.ca/e n/Petition/Details?Petition=e- 41
Private concussion clinics called a ‘Wild West’ of unregulated treatment
Volunteer neurosurgeons staffing a concussion hotline 24 hours a day?
That was the headline reported in the Toronto Star, CBC, CTV, and major newspapers in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario in early September.
Limitation Period Dismisses Two ICBC Injury Claims
In the recent case (DeWolfe v. Jones) the Plaintiff spouses were both injured in a 2005 collision. They dealt with ICBC directly but never reached settlement. During a conversation the acting adjuster, in response to the Plaintiffs advising they were not prepared to settle at the time told them that “I am leaving on maternity leave at month end and he knows that he can call to settle if things improve at any point.”
Jugmohan v. Royle, 2016 ONCA 827 (CanLII)
[3] First, the appellant says the jury verdict is perverse as the evidence supported a finding that she suffered compensable damages as a result of the accident. This ground of appeal includes the appellant’s argument that the trial judge erred by correcting his jury charge from his initial instructions, in which he expressed the view that an assessment of zero damages would not be appropriate, to an instruction that if the jury were to find that the accident did not cause any new injury, or exacerbation of any pre-existing injury, an award of zero damages would be available.
[6] The findings of a jury are entitled to great deference, particularly in cases such as this that depend largely on credibility. A jury verdict will not be set aside unless so plainly unreasonable and unjust as to satisfy the court that no jury reviewing the evidence as a whole and acting judicially could have reached it. On the evidence, it was open to this jury to conclude that the injuries that formed the basis of the appellant’s claim were not caused by the accident and therefore that the appellant was not entitled to any damages.
FAIR Submission to LSUC on Advertising and Fee Arrangements Oct 2016
Both “brokerage house” and “settlement mill” models bring the legal industry into disrepute and harm innocent and legitimately injured auto accident victims who may not get the quality representation or the full value of the settlement they deserve.
fair-submission-to-lsuc-on-advertising-and-fee-arrangements-oct-2016
So we ask – why is the Ontario government gifting auto insurers with our healthcare dollars?
For 11 years the Ontario government has known that the taxpayers are paying too much for the healthcare of MVA victims post accident. The Auditor General has told them so in more than one report. The Minister of Finance recently put out the HSPRN report that acknowledges that the actual cost to OHIP was $383 million in 2013/14. This is a shortfall of $241 million in just one year. The loss to the taxpayer, who is paying while insurers aren’t, is well over $1 billion in just the last 5 years alone.
Ontario auto insurers continue to pay just $142 million per year.
So we ask – why is the Ontario government gifting auto insurers?
With a total of 69,724 incidents in 2013/14 this amounts to a total present value (net actuarial liability) of $383,099,805 for MVAs that occurred in 2013/14. HSPRN Report, “Cost of Public Health Services for Ontario Residents Injured as a Result of a Motor Vehicle Accident”
2011 Annual Report of the Office of the Auditor General of Ontario http://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arreports/en11/301en11.pdf– see page 65 In 2005, our audit of the recovery of health costs resulting from accidents led us to conclude that the Ministries of Health and Finance did not have satisfactory policies and procedures in place to monitor the adequacy of the initial $80-million annual assessment. Subsequently, the government increased the annual assessment in September 2006 to about $142 million.
A call for public consultation and reinstatement of auto insurance benefits
Automobile insurance rate are rising and accident benefits have been reduced. Catastrophic injury benefits have been cut by 50%. Through these changes and reductions, the Ontario government has sacrificed the most vulnerable citizens in exchange for political gain.
Petition for public consultation and reinstatement of auto insurance benefits petition can be forwarded to: Michael Harris MPP, 4281 King Street East, #4, Kitchener, Ontario, N2P 2E9
Online petition: https://www.change.org/p/liberal-government-of-ontario-a-call-for-public-consultation-and-reinstatement-of-auto-insurance-benefits