Dr. Debow

The plaintiff in a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident brought a preliminary motion to exclude photographs of vehicle damage at trial.

The plaintiff argued the photographs were irrelevant since liability was admitted, and that admitting them without expert biomechanical evidence would invite unguided speculation by the jury that minor vehicle damage equates to minor injury.

The court dismissed the motion, holding that the photographs were relevant to causation and admissible without expert evidence, as causation is a matter of common sense.

The court noted that a jury instruction would be given to clarify that serious injuries can still result from low-impact collisions.

The plaintiff brought an action for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.

Following a jury verdict that resulted in net zero damages due to deductibles and prior settlements, the court ruled on the defence's threshold motion.

The court preferred the evidence of the plaintiff's experts, finding that the plaintiff suffered from chronic pain syndrome caused by the accident.

The court concluded that the plaintiff sustained a permanent and serious impairment of an important function, thereby meeting the statutory threshold, despite the action ultimately being dismissed.

The plaintiff sued a police officer and the police services board for assault and negligence following a traffic stop and arrest.

The plaintiff, who was pulled over by an unmarked police car for speeding, claimed he did not realize the officer was police and alleged the arrest caused him physical soreness and severe PTSD.

The court dismissed the action, finding the officer had reasonable grounds to arrest the plaintiff for evading police and used minimal force.

The court also held that the plaintiff's alleged psychiatric injury was not foreseeable, as it stemmed from his peculiar personality structure rather than the defendants' actions.