Neutral Citation: 1995 ONICDRG 22
File No. A-005088
ONTARIO INSURANCE COMMISSION
BETWEEN:
LILLIAN BALDASSARRA
Applicant
and
WELLINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY
Insurer
DECISION
Issues:
The Applicant, Lillian Baldassarra, was injured in a motor vehicle accident on August 19, 1991. She applied for and received statutory accident benefits from the Insurer, payable under Ontario Regulation 6721. Weekly income benefits were terminated by the Insurer on May 31, 1993. The parties were unable to resolve their disputes through mediation and the Applicant applied for arbitration under the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.I.8, as amended.
The issue in this hearing is:
- Is the Applicant, Lillian Baldassarra, entitled to benefits under section 12(1) of the Schedule on the basis that she suffers substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment with Oshawa Foods and King Ranch Spa after May 31, 1993?
The Applicant also claims interest on any amounts owing, and her expenses incurred in the hearing.
The parties agree that in the event that the Applicant establishes her entitlement to further weekly income benefits under section 12(1), the quantum of weekly income benefit is not in dispute.
Result:
The Applicant, Lillian Baldassarra, is entitled to benefits under section 12(1) of the Schedule on the basis that she suffered substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment with Oshawa Foods and King Ranch Spa after May 31, 1993.
The Applicant is entitled to interest on amounts owing, and her expenses incurred in the hearing.
Hearing:
The hearing was held in Toronto, Ontario, on June 13, 14 and 30, 1994, before me, Janice Mackintosh, arbitrator.
Present at the Hearing:
Applicant:
Lillian Baldassarra
Applicant's
Giulia Falbo Ahmadi
Representative:
Barrister and Solicitor
Insurer's
Colin S. Jackson
Representative:
Barrister and Solicitor
Witnesses:
Mrs. Lillian Baldassarra, Dr. Abraham Sasson, Ms. Margaret Gilbey, Dr. Henry Gallay, Ms. Cecilia Sousa, James G. McConkey.
Exhibits:
The 34 exhibits and other documents before the arbitrator are listed in Schedule A.
Evidence and Findings:
Mrs. Baldassarra was 52 years old when she was involved in a motor vehicle accident on August 19, 1991. The car in which she was a passenger hit the side of a truck. In anticipation of the impact she gripped the armrest on the passenger door with her right hand and planted her left foot on the floor of the car. She was thrown forward on impact and was stopped by the seat belt.
Mrs. Baldassarra immediately felt a sharp pain in her right shoulder, radiating down her right arm. She was taken to York Central Hospital where her right arm was put into a sling. At York Central she experienced difficulty walking on her left ankle, and she complained of pain in her head, neck, shoulders, and right chest.
Prior to the accident, Mrs. Baldassarra had enjoyed good health. She was trained as a cashier in 1975 (Exhibit 18) and had been working for Food City as a check-out cashier since 1983 (Exhibit 1). Mrs. Baldassarra averaged more than 35 hours per week and worked approximately five or six days each week. The physical requirements of her job included repetitive movement of the upper body including the right shoulder, arm and hand, long periods of standing, twisting, turning, pushing, pulling, bagging groceries and lifting weights of up to 25 pounds from waist height to chest height, and lifting 50 pounds for distances of up to 10 feet (Exhibit 26).
Several months before the accident, Mrs. Baldassarra obtained a second job with the night cleaning staff of the now bankrupt, King Ranch Spa (Exhibit 2). She worked from 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. five days a week, cleaning various sections of the three and one half storey facility which included offices, a health spa, tennis and squash courts, weight and fitness rooms, pool, washrooms, and public areas such as a bar, dining room, music room, and a 35 seat theatre. Mrs. Cecilia Sousa, the executive housekeeper in charge of cleaning staff at King Ranch Spa during its 21 month operation, provided a detailed description of Mrs. Baldassarra's essential tasks. The physical requirements of the cleaning job included constant standing or walking, frequent bending, reaching, pushing, kneeling, vacuuming and stair climbing, as well as occasional stooping, pulling, mopping, and sweeping. The Applicant was also required to use both arms to push a four foot high cart stocked with cleaning equipment and supplies. She was regularly required to lift a 30 pound vacuum cleaner up and down stairs.
I am satisfied that the essential tasks of Mrs. Baldassarra's job as a cleaner were more physically demanding than those of her job as a cashier and involved frequent and varied use of her right shoulder, arm, and hand.
Prior to her accident, Mrs. Baldassarra rarely missed work due to illness and had not suffered a chronic pain complaint. On the day following her accident, Mrs. Baldassarra saw Dr. Abe Sasson, who has been her regular family doctor for 13 years. Dr. Sasson observed bruising over her left flank, a 70% reduction in the range of motion of her neck, muscle spasm in the neck and back, reduced range of motion of her low back, pain in her right chest, and decreased movement and tenderness in her right shoulder and elbow. Mrs. Baldassarra is right-handed. Dr. Sasson diagnosed multiple soft tissue injuries. He continued to monitor Mrs. Baldassarra approximately once a month and has referred her to numerous therapists and specialists over the past two and one half years (Exhibits 3(a), (b), (c) and 4).
Mrs. Baldassarra acknowledged that following the accident her range of motion and level of function gradually improved as a result of treatment, therapy, and the passage of time. The range of motion in her neck increased, and the difficulty with her left foot was largely resolved by February 1992. Dr. Sasson testified that he has observed no muscle spasm during the last two years. In the first few months following the accident, Mrs. Baldassarra held her right shoulder immobile, with her right arm bent at a 90 degree angle at her side. Now she can straighten the arm and has regained some use of her right shoulder, elbow, and arm.
In October 1991, Dr. Sasson referred Mrs. Baldassarra to Physiogenic Rehabilitation Services for physiotherapy and to Dr. Ameis, a physiatrist, who specializes in the treatment of injury and the rehabilitation from resultant disability. In his report to Dr. Sasson dated January 20, 1992, Dr. Ameis noted improvements in the strength of Mrs. Baldassarra's right arm (Exhibit 4). In his report dated February 11, 1992, Dr. Ameis noted:
It is now time to take [Mrs. Baldassarra] off physiotherapy and place her back in the work force. I would like her to talk to her employer. A modified work approach would be helpful considering that she does cashier work which is prone to repetitive strain injuries to the upper extremities.
She was working part-time, and I would like to see that modified even more inasmuch [sic] as a 6 to 8 hour day is unacceptably long. I would rather see her working 3 or 4 hours, even 5 days a week.
Obviously, if we run into an obstacle in terms of the work, then it is going to have to be necessary to obtain some vocational assistance to find her an alternate form of employment rather than have her sitting at home inactive.
[emphasis added]
On February 14, 1992, Mrs. Baldassarra was discharged from her physiotherapy program because she had made considerable recovery in the movement of her neck and right arm, and had reached a plateau. She was given a home exercise program and was encouraged to return to work part-time, light duties (Exhibit 20).
On February 12, 1992, Dr. Sasson noted that Mrs. Baldassarra wanted to get back to work. He recommended that she attempt to return to her cashier's position for approximately three hours a day (Exhibit 4). Around this time, Mrs. Baldassarra approached her former employer at Food City about returning to work as a cashier on a limited basis. She was informed that she could not return to her former position until her health was 100 per cent. Mrs. Baldassarra testified that following this conversation she felt discouraged and worried about her prospects of returning to work.
Food City is part of Oshawa Foods. The manager of employee relations with Oshawa Foods testified that all cashiers with Oshawa Foods are designated as part-time employees. The shortest part-time shift available in any store is three hours, with one 15 minute break. On Sunday, the minimum shift is eight hours. A cashier must work a minimum of 24 hours within a seven day week. The manager testified that all cashiers are required to meet productivity standards of a specific number of items scanned per minute. In the manager's opinion, the use of a stool or other accommodation would significantly reduce a cashier's ability to meet the productivity targets.
The manager testified that repetitive strain injuries are commonplace among cashiers at Oshawa Foods. Oshawa Foods has determined that the company does not benefit from voluntary accommodations or concessions to part-time employees. The company makes modifications only when required to by the Worker's Compensation Board. The manager testified that Mrs. Baldassarra would be accepted back at her former store, but not until she could return to her full duties. The store where Mrs. Baldassarra worked has been changed from a Food City to a Price Chopper. This is a hectic, high volume store, with a large customer count. No vacancies are available in other stores, due to the company's efforts to down-size and let staff go.
In the spring of 1992, the Insurer retained the services of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants Inc. A rehabilitation counsellor, Mr. James McConkey, was assigned to report on and make recommendations concerning Mrs. Baldassarra's rehabilitation status. In his initial report, dated June 18, 1992, (Exhibit 25) Mr. McConkey stated that Mrs. Baldassarra missed her customers at Food City and sometimes dropped by after therapy. He reported that Mrs. Baldassarra enjoyed "the fuss they made over her" and their inquiries about when she would be returning to work. Mrs. Baldassarra reported being depressed. She stated that she did not go out unless she was going to therapy. In a follow up report, dated July 27, 1992 (Exhibit 26), Mr. McConkey recommended:
Mrs. Baldassara's [sic] depression, possible mild agoraphobia and fear of staying alone at night may be in part, if not totally, due to the accident and her related injuries. A combined program of active physical therapy (as opposed to passive therapy such as chiropracty), relaxation therapy, biofeedback and psychotherapy may provide an eclectic and synergistic approach to the multiple physical symptoms and psychosocial factors affecting the success of her rehabilitation and recovery.
As a result of this recommendation, the Applicant participated in an Interactional Assessment from September 28, 1992, to October 2, 1992 at The Columbia Centre for Integrated Health Services. The assessment report dated October 15, 1992 (Exhibit 21), concluded that Mrs. Baldassarra's overall level of fitness was fair, that she required physical conditioning to meet the physical demands of entry level employment, and that she was pain-focused and at moderate risk of developing chronic pain disability.
During the assessment Mrs. Baldassarra described herself as a "woman who does not give up". She reported that her main difficulty was her inability to work, and that work had helped her cope with her loss after her husband's death (in 1988). She also reported "down periods" when she would not answer the phone and stated that she was "reluctant to see friends because she feels she has too many problems and does not wish to burden them". The behavioral therapist observed: "She cried intermittenly [sic] and stated her emotional pain and the physical pain she experienced after the accident at times were entwined" (Exhibit 21).
As a result of this assessment, Mr. McConkey recommended that Mrs. Baldassarra participate in an intensive 16 week Modular Reactivation Program at The Columbia Health Care Centre, beginning October 26, 1992. The program consisted of graduated, supervised exercise combined with health education and promotion, backed up with psychosocial support (Exhibit 4, letter dated October 28, 1992).
As a result of the exercise portion of the program, Mrs. Baldassarra was reported to have demonstrated significant improvement in the range of movement in her neck and right shoulder (Exhibit 24).
The psychosocial component involved a daily cognitive-behavioral program to teach skills and concepts such as pacing, pain management, self-responsibility, motivation and stress management. Mrs. Baldassarra is reported to have expressed pessimism regarding her ability to return to work, referred to her financial dependency upon accident benefits, and exhibited irritability and inappropriate outbursts of anger (Exhibit 24).
Mrs. Baldassarra did not satisfactorily complete the vocational component of the Modular Reactivation Program and was discharged four weeks early because of "a lack of compliance" (Exhibit 24). She attended only six of the 14 days scheduled for work preparation. It was reported that she missed the program due to poor driving conditions, as well as complaints of pain, some of which were supported by notes from her family doctor. The test data that was collected indicated that Mrs. Baldassara did not possess the physical abilities to perform the job of a cashier. However, it was reported that she exhibited a more limited range of abilities when engaged in direct testing than when she was generally observed.
The letters of Mr. McConkey (Exhibits 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 33) and the revised discharge report of The Columbia Health Care Centre dated February 18, 1993, convey an increasing sense of frustration and exasperation with Mrs. Baldassara's failure to respond to the Modular Reactivation Program in the manner and to the degree expected. The revised discharge report attributed Mrs. Baldassarra's irregular attendance and failure "to fully engage in the task of making significant changes in her physical functioning or her maladaptive emotional behaviours" to a wilful lack of motivation (Exhibit 24).
By early summer 1993, three different orthopaedic surgeons had expressed the opinion that there was no longer any physiological basis to account for Mrs. Baldassarra's alleged pain and difficulty in performing arm and shoulder movements and lifting. Mr. McConkey and the Insurer considered Mrs. Baldassarra's reported "lack of compliance" with the Modular Reactivation Program and concluded that she simply lacked the motivation to participate in her own rehabilitation. The Insurer concluded that Mrs. Baldassarra preferred collecting benefits to working, six days a week, as she had before the accident. It terminated benefits as of May 31, 1993. However, in April 1993, Mrs. Baldassarra had begun an intensive psychiatric day treatment program at North York Branson Hospital. Contrary to the assumption of the Insurer, I find that Mrs. Baldassarra was motivated to rehabilitate herself.
Dr. Sasson first noted that Mrs. Baldassarra was experiencing depression and tension in March 1992 (Exhibit 4). In his testimony, he attributed her depression to her pain and her continuing inability to return to work, to engage in social activities, and to perform her household chores. Mrs. Baldassarra's depression deepened and Dr. Sasson referred her to Dr. Gallay, the chief of psychiatry at North York Branson Hospital. Dr. Gallay assessed Mrs. Baldassarra and arranged for treatment beginning in April 1993 (Exhibits 7 and 8).
Dr. Gallay testified that Mrs. Baldassarra was depressed and suffering from moderate post-traumatic stress and mixed anxiety syndrome. He determined that her condition warranted more than office visits once a week, and placed her in a hospital-based daily treatment program which provided intensive support for depression (Exhibit 4). She attended the hospital four days a week, from April 1993 to September 1993. In September she was transferred to the psychiatric out-patient department to continue her treatment.
As part of the day treatment program, Mrs. Baldassarra was assessed by a psychometrist and psychologist, and received counselling and psychotherapy. Dr. Gallay referred to a psychological consult report dated May 1993, which states (Exhibit 34):
In the case of Mrs. Baldassarra it is clear that her impaired physical health which has caused her to be unable to work as diligently as she has for all of her adult life has led to serious injuries to her self-worth....
That this woman is experiencing an anxiety disorder is a high probability.... She is experiencing as well a moderately severe depression which has now had a history of two years. She is feeling quite defeated by her condition and the associated negative cognitions which accompany depressive states are more pronounced....
For this woman, work constituted a fundamental purpose which no longer can be fulfilled. Additionally, her financial worries augment her anxious feelings and further fuel her depression. Once this acute condition resolves itself, Mrs. Baldassarra will need to reassess her vocational potential and adjust to it.
Dr. Gallay based his opinion on the assessment of the psychologist, and psychometrist as well as his own assessment and the experience of the psychotherapists who treated Mrs. Baldassarra over approximately eight months (Exhibit 7). He concluded that Mrs. Baldassarra's self-image and self-esteem were dependent upon her ability to work and maintain her financial independence. The loss of these abilities following the motor vehicle accident resulted in a serious compromise to her self-esteem, causing her to withdraw from people. This in turn contributed to further isolation and depression.
Dr. Gallay testified that Mrs. Baldassarra's depressive state was quite serious and persistent. Her mood was depressed more often than not. He suggested that depression would interfere with her ability to tolerate full-time, heavy stress activities, would affect her ability to interact with people, and at times even to care for herself. Dr. Gallay opined that Mrs. Baldassarra would benefit psychologically from a return to activity and work at a level she could handle and achieve success in.
Dr. Gallay observed that Mrs. Baldassarra was largely compliant with the psychiatric treatment program, although she missed some days and was reluctant to take the anti-depressant medication he recommended. He concluded that Mrs. Baldassarra's irregular attendance was more probably due to depression than wilful avoidance. The program resulted in moderate success in elevating Mrs. Baldassarra's mood. Her involvement with the program trailed off in December 1993.
I find that when Mrs. Baldassarra was discharged from the Modular Reactivation Program offered at Columbia Health Care Centre in February 1993, she was suffering from the long-standing depression, subsequently diagnosed by Dr. Gallay in April 1993. Dr. Gallay testified that Mrs. Baldassarra's general state of irritability and intermittent absences from the psychiatric day treatment program were symptomatic of her depressive state.
I prefer Dr. Gallay's opinion in respect of Mrs. Baldassarra's psychological and psychiatric state, to the opinion expressed by the behavioral therapist of the Columbia Health Care Centre. I conclude that Mrs. Baldassarra's irregular attendance at the Columbia Health Care Centre and her failure to "fully engage in the task of making significant changes in her physical functioning or her maladaptive emotional behaviours" at Columbia Health Care Centre was more likely due to her depression than to voluntary factors.
Dr. Sasson testified that by the summer of 1993, Mrs. Baldassarra appeared to have reached a plateau in her recovery. He observed that soft tissue injuries such as those she experienced to her right shoulder, chest, and arm, usually resolve within two years. However, in some cases a patient experiences chronic pain which can develop into a "chronic pain syndrome". Dr. Sasson opined that Mrs. Baldassarra suffers a "chronic pain syndrome" which includes mental or psychological factors as well as organic factors.
Dr. Sasson agreed that Mrs. Baldassarra would benefit from a return to the work force; however, he thought that she could not withstand the pain or stress of returning to her former position at Oshawa Foods or the significantly heavier work of a cleaning person.
Mrs. Baldassarra's chief remaining complaints are those of pain and depression. She maintains that the pain in her shoulders particularly on the right side, radiates down her right arm to her hand and results in numbness, weakness, and limitation of function. She states that numbness in her right arm is increasing and her headaches are more frequent. Over the past year she has developed sharp pains in her left shoulder, her lower back pain is increasing and now radiates down her left leg. Pain disturbs her sleep, and she feels depressed. She claims that the combination of these factors prevents her from performing the essential tasks of her two former jobs.
Pain is subjective in nature and cannot be measured by objective tests or standards. Consequently, all medical practitioners are dependent upon the Applicant's truthfulness and her accuracy in reporting pain, when formulating their opinions concerning her physical and mental ability to resume the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment. Counsel for the Insurer suggests that nothing prevents Mrs. Baldassarra from returning to work, and that she is exaggerating her reports of pain to avoid returning to a gruelling work schedule. Counsel for the Applicant maintains that Mrs. Baldassarra's pain is genuine and that the intensity of her pain is disabling from both a physical and psychological perspective.
Mrs. Baldassarra did not strike me as a person who did not want to get back to work. Rather, it appeared to me that she wanted and needed to work, but grew fearful and depressed that her pain might make it impossible for her to work as she had in the past. Mrs. Baldassarra's evidence was consistent, credible, and reasonable. I am satisfied that her experience of pain is real and not deliberately exaggerated. However, the experience of pain is not enough to support a claim for weekly income benefits. As stated by Senior Arbitrator Naylor, at page 23 of her decision Norman Downs and Allstate Insurance Company of Canada, July 18, 1991, OIC File No. A-000064:
Pain and suffering which is experienced as a result of injuries sustained in an automobile accident are not, per se, compensable under section 13, unless the experience of pain causes an insured to be substantially disabled, within the meaning of the section.
This observation applies equally to claims under section 12 of the Schedule.
In March 1993, Columbia Health Care Services conducted a functional abilities evaluation to determine Mrs. Baldassarra's physical ability to perform the essential tasks of a cashier (Exhibit 13). The report dated March 5, 1993, concluded that pain behaviour and anxiety appeared to be the main barriers to her return to work. The recommendations of the report were:
Mrs. Baldassarra could return to the work force with a gradual entry schedule. For example, begin working part-time and increase to full-time hours.
Modifications required would be:
a) That work station i.e. cash till and check out counter be lowered to a [sic] least 30 inches or else a subfloor be installed to address any height differential.
b) She would be best suited to using her left non-dominant hand rather than relying on her right to do the repetitive activities.
c) As part of her graded program she may start at the "under 10 items" counter in order to build up her tolerances.
d) In regards to her decreased standing tolerance a stool would be of benefit.
In a report prepared May 4, 1994, but based on testing done in March 1993, Columbia Health Care Services evaluated Mrs. Baldassarra's physical ability to perform the essential tasks of a cleaner (Exhibit 14). The report stated that her strength levels were in the light range, whereas her cleaning tasks were in the medium range. She was found to be restricted with respect to the requirements for standing, walking, stooping, forward reach, turning and handling, if the cleaning job demanded that such tasks be performed frequently.
I find that in March 1993, Mrs. Baldassarra's pain restricted her from performing the essential tasks of her job as a cashier or a cleaner under the same conditions and at the same number of hours that she previously worked.
It is clear that Oshawa Foods was not prepared to make any concessions or modifications to accommodate Mrs. Baldassarra's limitations. The evidence of Cecilia Sousa, of King Ranch Spa, established that Mrs. Baldassarra was expected to do any and every one of the range of cleaning tasks to which she might be assigned on a given night. Furthermore, I find that the reduced self-esteem and depression experienced by Mrs. Baldassarra as a result of the accident interfered with her ability to return to either of her pre-accident jobs on her former basis.
Mrs. Baldassarra participated in comprehensive treatment for her depression ending in December 1993. Dr. Gallay was of the opinion that Mrs. Baldassara derived moderate benefit from the program. Mrs. Baldassarra demonstrated new insight into her condition when she testified that she now understands that in order to maintain the function of her right shoulder, arm, and hand, she must force herself to use it, despite her pain.
The unanimous opinion of all the doctors and medical practitioners who treated or assessed Mrs. Baldassarra was that she would benefit physically and mentally by returning to work at a level she could handle and achieve success in. I am satisfied that by December 1993 Mrs. Baldassarra was physically and mentally ready to return to the workforce on a gradual, modified, basis which would have enabled her to incrementally work through her pain, build her tolerance, and regain her confidence. Unfortunately such opportunities were not available through her previous employers, and there was no evidence that Mrs. Baldassarra received any vocational assistance to find modified work. The Insurer did not argue that Mrs. Baldassarra had a positive duty to find modified work, and I make no finding on this point.
Mrs. Baldassarra did not rejoin the workforce and Dr. Sasson testified that her condition remains essentially as it was in the spring and summer of 1993, subject to some alleviation of her depression by December 1993. I find that Mrs. Baldassarra continued to suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment as a cashier and cleaning person after May 31, 1993.
Expenses:
The Applicant seeks an award of the expenses she has incurred in this arbitration. An award for expenses may be made under section 282(11) of the Insurance Act, which provides as follows:
The arbitrator may award to the insured person such expenses incurred in respect of an arbitration proceeding as may be prescribed in the regulations to the maximum set out in the regulations.
The prescribed expenses and amounts are set out in Schedule 1 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code and in Ontario Regulation 664, R.R.O. 1990, Dispute Resolution Expenses.
In Ralph McCormick and Economical Mutual Insurance Company, October 2, 1991, OIC File No. A-000139, Arbitrator Susan Naylor made the following comments about expenses, with which I agree:
The discretion to award expenses should be exercised, having regard to the intent and purpose of the legislative scheme. The arbitration process has been established under the Insurance Act, as amended, in order to facilitate applicants' access to relatively inexpensive, speedy and informal adjudication of disputes regarding no-fault benefits. The discretion to award expenses should be exercised in accordance with this objective, having regard to the individual circumstances of each case.
Accordingly, it is appropriate to award an applicant his or her expenses, unless, in the circumstances of the particular case, it is determined that the application for appointment of an arbitrator was manifestly frivolous or vexatious, or that the applicant's conduct unreasonably prolonged the proceedings.
The Director of Arbitrations approved this statement of the principles guiding an award of expenses in the appeal decision in Vito Luigi Calogero and The Co-Operators General Insurance Company, February 13, 1992, OIC File No. P-000251.
The Applicant is entitled to her expenses as set out in Schedule 1 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code. In the event that the parties cannot agree as to the total amount of expenses, I remain seized of this matter and a party may apply for assessment of the expenses before me.
Order:
The Applicant, Lillian Baldassara, is entitled to benefits under section 12(1) of the Schedule on the basis that she suffered substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment with Oshawa Foods and King Ranch Spa after May 31, 1993.
The Applicant is entitled to interest on any amounts owing, and her expenses incurred in the hearing.
March 13, 1995
Janice Mackintosh Arbitrator
Date
SCHEDULE A
Exhibits:
Applicant's Brief - Tab 21 - Employer's Confirmation of Income form, August 28, 1991 - Oshawa Foods
Applicant's Brief - Tab 23 - Employer's Confirmation of Income form, August 22, 1991 - King Ranch Spa
3a. Applicant's Brief - Tab 2 - Dr. Sasson's medical report, dated July 13, 1993
b. Applicant's Brief - Tab 3 - Dr. Sasson's medical report, dated December 6, 1993
c. Applicant's Brief - Tab 4 - Dr. Sasson's medical report, dated June 6, 1994
Applicant's Brief - Tab 5 - Dr. Sasson's clinical notes and records
Applicant's Brief - Tab 5 - Dr. West's consultation note, June 10, 1993
6a. Insurer's Brief - Tab 1 - Dr. Zeldin's medical report, dated October 18, 1991
b. Insurer's Brief - Tab 2 - Dr. Zeldin's medical report, dated January 24, 1992
c. Insurer's Brief - Tab 3 - Dr. Zeldin's medical report, dated May 13, 1992
Applicant's Brief - Tab 1 - Psychiatric records of North York Branson Hospital
Applicant's Brief - Tab 1 - Dr. Gallay's report, April 22, 1993
Applicant's Brief - Tab 6 - Richmond Hill Therapeutic Massage records
Applicant's Brief - Tab 7 - Physiogenic Rehabilitation Services records
11 .Applicant's Brief - Tab 10 - Dr. Boggio's clinical notes and records
Applicant's Brief - Tab 19 - Dr. Grossman's clinical notes and records
Applicant's Brief - Tab 15 - Columbia Health Care Functional Abilities Evaluation, March 5, 1993
Applicant's Brief - Tab 17 - Columbia Health Care Report, May 4, 1994
Applicant's Brief - Tab 20 - Motor Vehicle Accident Report
Applicant's Brief - Tab 22 - Counsel's letter to Oshawa Foods, December 9, 1993
Applicant's Brief - Tab 22 - Oshawa Food's letter to counsel, December 20, 1993
Applicant's Brief - Tab 29 - Cashier's certificate from Seneca College
Applicant's Brief - Tab 1 - Nerve conduction studies performed by North York Branson Hospital
Nancy Ameis' report, April 24, 1992
Applicant's Brief - Tab 11 - Interactional Assessment Report - The Columbia Centre, October 19, 1992
Applicant's Brief - Tab 12 - Progress Report # 1 - The Columbia Centre, dated December 8, 1992
Applicant's Brief - Tab 13 - Progress Report # 2 - Columbia Health Care, dated January 14, 1993
Applicant's Brief - Tab 16 - Revised Modular Reactivation Discharge Report, dated February 18, 1993
Insurer's Brief - Tab 4 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants Inc., June 18, 1992
Insurer's Brief - Tab 5 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, July 27, 1992
Insurer's Brief - Tab 6 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, September 9, 1992
Insurer's Brief - Tab 7 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, September 9, 1992
Insurer's Brief - Tab 8 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, January 7, 1993
Insurer's Brief - Tab 9 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, January 18, 1993
Insurer's Brief - Tab 10 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, February 16, 1993
Insurer's Brief - Tab 11 - Report of Dr. Fred Langer, April 15, 1993
Insurer's Brief - Tab 12 - Report of Canadian Rehabilitative Consultants, April 28, 1993
Applicant's Brief - Tab 9 - Dr. Gallay's Psychological Consult report, May 11, 1993, plus handwritten page of notes