3 total
Summary judgment granted dismissing personal injury claim as it was barred by a signed release and waiver.
The plaintiff, an actor, sued the defendant production company for personal injuries sustained while filming a commercial.
The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment, arguing the action was barred by a Release and Waiver the plaintiff signed to receive Accident on Set benefits.
The court found the waiver was clear, not unconscionable, and voluntarily signed by the plaintiff after she was given time to review it and ask questions.
The motion for summary judgment was granted and the action was dismissed.
Summary judgment granted where plaintiff failed to show occupier breached duty of care.
The defendant property owner brought a motion for summary judgment dismissing an action alleging occupiers’ liability following injuries sustained during a horse‑handling incident on a hobby farm.
The plaintiff alleged that the occupier negligently maintained fencing and gating which allegedly contributed to a horse-related accident.
The court held that the plaintiff failed to identify any act or omission by the occupier that breached the statutory duty under the Occupier’s Liability Act or the Negligence Act.
The evidence showed the fencing and gate were common and properly installed, and the alleged incident arose from the actions of the participants rather than any unsafe condition of the premises.
As no genuine issue requiring a trial was established, summary judgment dismissing the claim against the occupier was granted.
New trial ordered where trial judge's excessive interventions and criticism of police witness created appearance of unfairness.
The plaintiff's personal injury action was settled before trial, and the trial proceeded solely to determine liability between the two defendants following a motor vehicle accident.
During the jury trial, the trial judge repeatedly intervened during the cross-examination and re-examination of the investigating police officer, expressing strong opinions that the officer had failed to conduct a thorough investigation.
The trial judge reiterated these criticisms in his charge to the jury.
The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge's interventions and expressions of opinion crossed the line, usurped the role of counsel, and created an appearance of unfairness.
The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.