7 total
The court granted summary judgment dismissing most of the plaintiff's decade-old accident benefits claims due to issue estoppel, awarding only minor vehicle repair costs.
The court considered three summary judgment motions in a long-running dispute arising from a 2013 Michigan motor vehicle accident.
The plaintiff, Eunice Lucas-Logan, sought damages for denied accident benefits and property damage, while the defendants (Certas Direct Insurance Company and 2089402 Ontario Inc., operating as Emeryville Collision) sought dismissal.
The court found most of the plaintiff’s claims were barred by issue estoppel, as they had been finally determined in prior administrative and court proceedings.
The only relief granted was an order that the defendants pay $1,197.07 for outstanding vehicle repairs, subject to set-off against a prior costs order.
All other claims, including for mental distress, bad faith, and conspiracy, were dismissed.
Insurer's appeal dismissed; failure to provide election form for accident benefits prevented limitation period from commencing.
The appellant insurer appealed an arbitrator's decision that the denial of the respondent's caregiver benefit was invalid and that she was entitled to elect her preferred weekly benefit.
The insurer argued that the OCF-1 application form constituted an application for all weekly benefits, allowing it to deny all benefits without an election, relying on recent case law.
The Director's Delegate dismissed the appeal, finding that the arbitrator correctly distinguished the case law because the insurer had actual knowledge that the respondent might qualify for more than one benefit, triggering the election requirement under section 36(2) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
Because the insurer failed to provide the required election form, the limitation period did not commence, and the respondent could still make her election.
Motion for a special award dismissed as there was no underlying finding of entitlement to benefits.
The applicant sought a special award under s. 282(10) of the Insurance Act, arguing that the insurer unreasonably withheld or delayed payments for statutory accident benefits, including a non-earner benefit and previously settled medical treatment plans.
The arbitrator dismissed the motion, finding that a special award cannot be ordered without a finding of an underlying entitlement to benefits under the Schedule.
Since no such finding of entitlement had been made, the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to order a special award.
Applicant awarded $19,629.68 in expenses following a successful preliminary issue hearing for statutory accident benefits.
The applicant sought expenses following a successful preliminary issue hearing regarding statutory accident benefits.
The arbitrator awarded the applicant $19,629.68 in expenses, inclusive of fees, disbursements, and HST, applying a 1:4 ratio for hearing to preparation time and utilizing the legal aid hourly rate.
Insurer's denial of caregiver benefits invalid where applicant never submitted an OCF-10 election form.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought accident benefits.
The insurer denied caregiver benefits based on the OCF-1 application and a medical certificate, arguing the claim was now statute-barred due to the passage of the two-year limitation period.
The applicant argued the denial was invalid because she had never submitted an OCF-10 election form to choose between caregiver and non-earner benefits.
The Arbitrator found that an election was necessary under section 36 of the Schedule and that the OCF-1 alone was insufficient to constitute an election.
Because no valid election was made, the insurer's denial was invalid, and the limitation period did not begin to run.
The applicant was granted the right to elect her preferred benefit without a time limit.
Damages award recalculated to properly apply statutory deductible and contributory negligence.
In an addendum to a trial judgment, the court corrected a calculation error in the damages award based on the jury's decision.
With the agreement of counsel, the court recalculated the award by applying a 20 percent reduction for contributory negligence to the pecuniary damages, and applying the statutory deductible followed by the contributory negligence reduction to the non-pecuniary damages.
The total judgment was amended to $136,483.20.
Successful plaintiff in motor vehicle accident jury trial awarded $72,000 in partial indemnity costs.
Following a jury trial for a motor vehicle accident where the plaintiff was awarded $160,480 after a 20% deduction for contributory negligence, the court determined the costs of the action.
One of the plaintiffs abandoned her claim on the eve of trial.
The court declined to award costs directly against the abandoning plaintiff but reduced the successful plaintiff's costs to reflect the shared representation.
The successful plaintiff was awarded $72,000 in costs on a partial indemnity basis, with a deduction for an insurance premium disbursement.
