M. Hershkop

The plaintiff brought a motion to amend her statement of claim to substitute the names of two individuals for 'John Doe' defendants who allegedly caused her severe burns during a cosmetic laser treatment.

One of the proposed defendants opposed the motion, arguing she did not treat the plaintiff and would suffer prejudice.

The court applied the 'litigation finger' test for misnomer, finding that the statement of claim clearly pointed to the proposed defendant as the intended target.

The court rejected the proposed defendant's denial of liability as irrelevant to a misnomer motion and found no actual prejudice.

The motion to amend was granted.

During a medical malpractice jury trial, the plaintiffs sought to qualify a paediatrician and neonatologist to give expert evidence on the standard of care applicable to the defendant family physician.

The defendants objected, arguing the expert was not a family physician and his evidence would be duplicative and prejudicial.

The court applied the two-stage test for expert evidence and held that the expert was qualified to testify on the minimum standard of care applicable to all physicians regarding well-baby checkups and head circumference measurements.

The court found the evidence was not overly complex or confusing and its benefit outweighed any potential prejudice.