2 total
The court ordered an assignment of accident benefits, limited the bankrupt defendants' liability to insurance limits, and significantly reduced the plaintiffs' costs due to sharp practice.
This decision addresses a costs award and ancillary matters following a jury verdict in a personal injury action.
The jury found the defendants 62% liable, awarding substantial damages for pain and suffering, future care costs, and family law damages.
The court ruled on four key issues: ordering an assignment of accident benefits, limiting the McEwens' personal liability to insurance policy limits due to their bankruptcy, applying a 5% pre-judgment interest rate for non-pecuniary damages (finding the relevant statutory amendment not retrospective), and applying the new statutory deductible of $18,270.00 to the Family Law claim.
Despite the jury verdict exceeding some settlement offers, the court significantly reduced the plaintiffs' requested costs from $795,616.09 to $375,000, citing the plaintiffs' conduct, including late expert reports, changing their position on calling the plaintiff, and engaging in "sharp practice" by attempting to enforce a settlement offer while simultaneously initiating a bad faith claim against an insurer.
Insurer ordered to pay income replacement benefits and a 35% special award for unreasonable delay.
The applicant, a self-employed pedorthist, was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed statutory accident benefits.
The insurer disputed her entitlement to income replacement benefits, arguing she was not substantially disabled and disputing the calculation of her post-accident business expenses.
The arbitrator found the applicant suffered a mild traumatic brain injury and was substantially disabled until October 1995.
The arbitrator allowed most of the applicant's post-accident business expenses, finding they were reasonably incurred to prevent a loss of revenue in her expanded business, but denied her claim for loss of profits.
The arbitrator also awarded various medical and rehabilitation benefits, including psychological counselling and a treadmill.
A special award of 35% was imposed against the insurer for unreasonably delaying and withholding benefits, particularly psychological counselling, despite recommendations from multiple assessors.
