D. D'urzo

The defendants brought a motion for a declaration that the plaintiff's injuries from an automobile accident did not meet the verbal threshold under the Insurance Act, which would bar recovery for non-pecuniary general damages and healthcare expenses.

The court found that the plaintiff, Balbir Mann, failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he suffered a permanent, serious impairment of an important bodily function.

The plaintiff's credibility as a historian was significantly undermined by inconsistencies in his testimony, reports to doctors, and surveillance video footage.

Consequently, the expert opinions based on his unreliable self-reports were also deemed unreliable.

The court allowed the defendants' motion, dismissing the plaintiff's action for non-pecuniary general damages and healthcare expenses.

In a personal injury jury trial, the plaintiff sought to introduce evidence of two litigation loans taken post-accident to cover medical, rehabilitation, and living expenses.

The defendants objected, arguing the loans were not recoverable as damages due to remoteness and foreseeability, and that pre-judgment interest already compensated for loss of use of money.

The court ruled the evidence inadmissible, finding that neither the principal nor interest on litigation loans are recoverable as damages, as they are too remote and not reasonably foreseeable to the defendant at the time of the accident.

Public policy considerations, including the existence of statutory pre-judgment interest and the potential for encouraging high-interest loans, also weighed against admissibility.