Dr. Gryfe

Following a jury trial for a motor vehicle accident where the jury awarded $40,000 in non-pecuniary damages, the defendant brought a threshold motion to dismiss the claim.

The court analyzed whether the plaintiff's soft tissue injuries, TMJ dysfunction, and psychological issues were caused by the accident and constituted a permanent serious impairment.

The court found that only the whiplash injury was caused by the accident, while the TMJ and psychological issues were pre-existing or unrelated.

The court concluded that the whiplash injury, although permanent, was not a serious impairment as it did not substantially interfere with the plaintiff's usual activities.

The threshold motion was granted and the claim for non-pecuniary damages was dismissed.

The defendant moved for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's dental malpractice claim.

The court found genuine issues for trial regarding the standard of care and causation, citing conflicting expert opinions and factual disputes, particularly concerning the defendant's discovery evidence.

The motion for summary judgment was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.

The defendant Lynn Cunningham brought a motion to dismiss the plaintiff Yolanda Girao's claims for non-pecuniary loss, arguing that the plaintiff failed to prove her injuries met the statutory threshold under subsection 267.5(5) of the Insurance Act.

The court applied the "but for" test for causation and the three-part threshold test (permanence, importance, seriousness of impairment).

It found that while the plaintiff suffered three soft tissue injuries caused by the accident, she failed to prove causation for chronic pain, fibromyalgia, temporomandibular joint issues, dizziness, and the severity of her psychological issues.

Consequently, the plaintiff did not establish a permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental, or psychological function directly caused by the accident, leading to the dismissal of her non-pecuniary loss claim.