Dr. Myra McCormick

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits (IRBs) from the respondent insurer.

The insurer terminated the IRBs, and the applicant appealed to the Licence Appeal Tribunal seeking IRBs for a disputed period of approximately three weeks before she returned to work.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide contemporaneous medical evidence demonstrating a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a hairdresser.

Relying on the respondent's multidisciplinary independent medical examination, the Tribunal dismissed the claim for IRBs, interest, and costs.

In a voir dire during a personal injury jury trial arising from a motor vehicle accident, the court ruled on the admissibility of expert evidence from three of the plaintiff's proposed medical experts.

The court permitted a chiropractor and an orthopedic surgeon to testify within their specific scopes of practice regarding musculoskeletal issues and trigger points, but precluded them from diagnosing the plaintiff's swallowing disorder (achalasia) or providing threshold opinions on that impairment.

A second chiropractor was entirely excluded from testifying due to clear bias, partisan methodology, and opining outside his area of expertise.