On Dec. 9, 2011, Law Society of Upper Canada members identified as a priority for the coming year the examination of alternative business structures (ABS) as a means of delivering legal services in Ontario. Based on the contents of the first report to convocation of the ABS working group (last June) and numerous comments at the society’s ABS symposium in October of last year, some form of ABS is likely to be approved in Ontario in the coming months and that will likely have implications for the personal-injury bar. Continue reading →
In a typical personal injury case, there are a number of approaches to developing the theory of economic loss and a number of assumptions are made as part of that theory. In cases where a person is unlikely to return to work or has returned to work but is likely to have to retire earlier than otherwise would have been the case, a major part of the theory revolves around the person’s expected retirement age, but for the accident. While each case turns on its own facts, to some extent both plaintiff counsel and defence counsel will base their theories on a presumed retirement age. Many defence theories are based on an outdated notion that people are embracing the idea of Freedom 55 and retiring earlier than in previous generations. The recent data on this point clearly shows an upward trend in retirement age. There are two very good reasons for this trend; people are living longer and saving less for retirement and people simply cannot afford to retire. Continue reading →
In a court action for damages arising out of an injury, judges and juries will rely upon the opinions of health professionals in order to understand and interpret the facts of a plaintiff’s claim. However, many health professionals are understandably hesitant to express their opinions within this context. This article is intended to assist health professionals in this regard, through a discussion of what a health professional may expect and how best to prepare, if called to appear as a witness at trial.
The scope of the expert’s testimony
When an expert takes the stand at trial, he or she will not be narrowly confined and limited to the precise content of his or her report, which would have been delivered pursuant to theEvidence Act. A medical expert has a right to explain, amplify and expand on what is latent in the medical report – so long as they are not opening a new field. The purpose of the rule is to facilitate orderly trial preparation by providing opposing parties with adequate notice of opinion evidence to be adduced at trial. Continue reading →
Do you have a claim?
Let McLeish Orlando help you get what you deserve like they’ve helped so many others
McLeish Orlando is a Toronto personal injury law firm representing people who have been seriously injured and family members who have lost a loved one through the negligence of others. McLeish Orlando is a recognized leader within wrongful death and personal injury law. We represent people who have suffered brain injuries, spinal cord injuries and serious orthopaedic injuries. We strive for a fair settlement and the best possible results for our clients.
We speak your language including:
French | Cantonese | Greek | Hebrew | Hindi | Italian Mandarin | Tamil | Punjabi | Urdu | Spanish | Tagalog Korean | Polish | Arabic | Portugese | Russian | Persian | Gujurati