3 total
Obstetrician found liable for infant's permanent brachial plexus injury caused by excessive traction during delivery.
The infant plaintiff suffered a severe and permanent brachial plexus injury during birth after encountering shoulder dystocia.
The plaintiffs brought a medical negligence action against the delivering obstetrician, alleging he applied excessive downward traction.
The defendant argued the injury was caused by maternal propulsive forces.
The court found that the defendant breached the standard of care by applying more than gentle downward traction, which caused the injury.
The court awarded $811,564 in total damages, including non-pecuniary damages, future care costs, future loss of income, and Family Law Act damages for the family.
Defamation action dismissed as magazine's article criticizing unvalidated prenatal paternity test was substantially true and responsibly communicated.
The plaintiffs, a genetic testing company and its director, sued the defendants for defamation over a magazine article criticizing their non-invasive prenatal paternity test.
The article alleged the test was dangerous, unreliable, and prone to error.
The court found the article was defamatory but dismissed the action, holding that the defendants successfully established the defences of justification, qualified privilege, fair comment, and responsible communication.
The court found the plaintiffs failed to properly validate their test according to accepted scientific methodology, rendering the test unreliable and the article's claims substantially true.
Assessment of airport lands reduced; MPAC failed to prove highest and best use changed to development land.
The Appellants appealed the 2012 property tax assessment of the Buttonville Airport Lands.
MPAC had increased the assessment of the main airport parcel from $31.4 million to $63.6 million, arguing that the highest and best use of the land had changed from an airport to urban development land following the sale of a partial interest to a developer.
The Assessment Review Board found that MPAC is legally permitted to change its opinion of value during the four-year assessment cycle.
However, the Board held that MPAC failed to prove that the highest and best use of the land had changed as of the valuation date, given the significant regulatory hurdles and long development timeframes still required.
The Board concluded that the cost approach remained the most appropriate valuation method and reduced the 2012 assessment back to $31.4 million.