6 total
Application for accident benefits dismissed; applicant failed to prove injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
The respondent denied certain medical and assessment benefits on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).
The applicant argued that a pre-existing knee condition, a concussion, and psychological impairments warranted removal from the MIG.
The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of a pre-existing condition precluding recovery, no medical diagnosis of a concussion, and preferred the respondent's psychological assessment which found no DSM-5 diagnosis.
The application was dismissed as the MIG limits were exhausted.
The court stayed the plaintiff's action for failing to pay agreed-upon costs thrown away.
The defendant moved to dismiss or stay the action due to the plaintiff's failure to pay $33,000 in costs thrown away from a mistrial.
The plaintiff cross-moved to set aside, suspend, or vary the costs order, claiming impecuniosity.
The court dismissed the plaintiff's cross-motion, finding no basis to vary the agreed-upon costs.
The court granted the defendant's motion for a stay, but not dismissal, conditional on the plaintiff paying the costs within 60 days, failing which the action would be dismissed.
Application for catastrophic impairment and ongoing accident benefits dismissed due to lack of medical evidence proving causation.
The self-represented applicant sought a determination of catastrophic impairment and ongoing housekeeping and non-earner benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
The applicant suffered from pre-existing schizophrenia and other mental health challenges.
The arbitrator found that the applicant failed to meet the evidentiary burden of proving a whole person impairment in excess of 55% under the AMA Guides, or that his psychological deterioration was caused by the accident rather than his pre-existing condition.
As the applicant was not found to be catastrophically impaired and had exhausted his non-catastrophic limits, the claims for further housekeeping and non-earner benefits were dismissed.
Arbitrator awarded partially successful applicant $5,722.00 in expenses for a non-complex arbitration hearing.
The applicant sought expenses following an arbitration decision where she was partially successful in claiming housekeeping and home maintenance benefits.
The applicant claimed $15,537.50 in legal fees and $2,722.00 in disbursements.
The insurer argued each party should bear its own expenses.
The arbitrator considered the degree of success, settlement offers, and conduct during the proceeding under Rule 75 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.
Finding the applicant partially successful and the case not complex, the arbitrator awarded $3,000.00 for fees and $2,722.00 for disbursements, totaling $5,722.00.
Statutory accident benefits claims dismissed after applicant failed to attend the arbitration hearing.
The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
After her legal representative withdrew due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, the applicant failed to attend a pre-hearing discussion and the scheduled arbitration hearing.
As the applicant did not attend to present evidence, she failed to establish entitlement to the benefits claimed.
The arbitrator dismissed the claims and ordered the applicant to pay the insurer's arbitration expenses in the amount of $1,100.
Late service of third party claim allowed absent demonstrated prejudice.
The moving defendant sought an extension of time to serve a third party claim arising from a motor vehicle accident after discovering that the pleading, though issued in time, had never been served due to inadvertence.
The court held that the applicable inquiry was whether the proposed third party would suffer prejudice from the delay, and found none because the proposed third party's counsel had long been involved in related actions, discoveries, and mediation arising from the same accident.
The court therefore extended the time for service.
Costs were awarded to the moving party on a partial indemnity basis, not substantial indemnity, because the motion arose from the moving party's own error.
