The plaintiffs brought two motions in a medical malpractice action: one to compel defendant physicians Dr. Fadie Amin and Dr. Anton Helman to answer refusals from discovery, and another for leave to amend their statement of claim to include additional differential diagnoses.
The court analyzed the principles governing hypothetical questions in discovery and the test for amending pleadings.
The refusals motion was largely granted against Dr. Helman, with several questions ordered to be answered or clarified, while largely dismissed against Dr. Amin.
The motion for leave to amend the statement of claim was granted, allowing the plaintiffs to specify additional serious conditions the defendants allegedly failed to consider.
