416-703-2402 Local
1-888-378-3388 Toll Free

Posts Categorized: motion

Facebook Defence – 1,500 Pages Sought – Personal Injury Lawsuit – Part 5

Three separate plaintiffs suing for damages arising from a dog attack, pursuant to Ontario’s Dog Owner’s Liability Act, had three different Facebook and MySpace accounts containing approximately 1,500 pages of photographs, blogs and emails.

In the 2009 Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision of Kent v. Laverdiere, Master Haberman extensively reviewed the merits of the defendant’s motion for production of the three separate plaintiffs and their social networking profiles, totaling more than 1,500 pages.

The main issue concerning this motion was the extensive nature of production sought (and the number of hours required to properly produce this information) versus the imminent Trial date, set for four weeks after this subject motion.… Continue Reading

Facebook Defence – Give Me Access! – Personal Injury Lawsuits – Part 4

One of the earlier Ontario cases dealing with disclosure of a plaintiff’s Facebook account profile was the 2007 Ontario Superior Court of Justice case of Murphy v. Perger (2007) 67 C.P.C. (6th) 245, in which Madam Justice Rady ordered production of a plaintiff’s Facebook account profile, which was marked as a “private” account but had 366 Facebook “friends” attached.

The defendant, in this productions motion, did not seek access to the email communications contained on the plaintiff’s Facebook account.

The plaintiff solicitor had, prior to this motion, produced pictures of the plaintiff showing her pre-accident activities, in support of her claim post-accident of suffering from fibromyalgia and TMJ (temporomandibular joint) disorder.… Continue Reading

Facebook Defence Strikes Again in Personal Injury Lawsuits – Part 3

You enjoy keeping in touch with family and friends on Facebook.  It is an easy way to stay current with old acquaintances.

Then you are involved in a car accident or slip and fall accident.  You are badly hurt.  Eventually you go to see a lawyer to help you start a lawsuit, as you are unable to work and earn an income.  Your ongoing pain and need to seek medical treatment convinces you that your injuries may be long-term.

You start a lawsuit. … Continue Reading

Think TWICE Before Pleading Guilty to a Highway Traffic Act Charge

An interesting recent case confirms the gut reaction of most readers, as to whether they should plead guilty to a HTA (Highway Traffic Act) charge if they feel, in fact, that they are not liable for the accident resulting in the charge.

What happens if you plead guilty, at the Highway Traffic Act trial, and accept a $1000 fine? If the Highway Traffic Act charge relates to an accident caused by your ex-husband, driving your car?

What happens, if later, an insurance companies sues you personally in order to recover approximately $30,000, that was paid out to a plaintiff (i.e.… Continue Reading

Videotaping Medical Experts (Examining You on Behalf of the Opposing Insurance Company) – Part 3

Further to our September 15, 2010 blog and our October 27, 2010 blog, we discuss the ongoing caselaw on the issue of audiotaping or videotaping a defence medical assessment arising in a personal injury lawsuit.

In Bakalenikov v. Semkiw (2010 Ontario Superior Court of Justice), the issue of videotaping or audiotaping a psychiatry defence medical assessment is discussed, with an extensive analysis of the caselaw and effect of Rule 53.03.

Master Short notes that the objectivity of the proposed defence psychiatrist is challenged in this motion. … Continue Reading

Videotaping the Medical Expert Who Is Examining You (on Behalf of the Opposing Insurance Company) – Part 2

If you are hurt in an Ontario car accident, you may decide to sue for damages arising from your injury and loss.

During your lawsuit, the insurance company defending your claim may wish to evaluate you by requiring you to attend for one or more medical assessments by medical doctors of their choosing.

Are you allowed to audiotape or videotape this medical assessment?  As background, readers may wish to review our September 15, 2010 blog.

A recent and important analysis of this issue is found in Adams v.Continue Reading