Recent Legal Decisions
8 Million Dollar Win at the Supreme Court of Canada
After winning a groundbreaking negligence ruling and award of $8 million for our catastrophically injured client in court in Ontario, we were successful at the Ontario Court of Appeal and again at the Supreme Court of Canada.
In June 2017 our fight for justice for our client ended in victory when The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with Robert Hooper’s argument on the standard of care for children involved in car accidents. The Supreme Court of Canada would not hear the defendant’s appeal. Three levels of Court had agreed with our fight and win for the victim who was ten years old at the time of the accident while crossing a four-lane road on the way to school.
All three courts confirmed that our client was not negligent and he was entitled to be fully compensated for the critical injuries he received in the accident.
To click on links below to read more about the case:
Lexfund v. Ferro. Facing monetary losses that accompany injuries, like income loss from not being able to work, is extremely stressful. Navigating the legal process to get the appropriate compensation can also add a unexpected amount of stress. If you are injured, you need someone who will minimize rather than add to these stresses. Below is a link to a case in which Hooper Law advocated successfully for a group of clients who the Court found were unfairly treated by two different parties during the process of seeking compensation for their injuries: Lexfund v. Ferro
Romanoski Estate v. Seburn. Accidents can be devastating not only to the person who was involved in the accident, but also to their families. When a family member dies in an accident, the loss is permanent and life changing. Below is a link to a case in which Hooper Law advocated successfully on behalf of a woman who was in a stable relationship with her partner, though they weren’t married and had not yet lived together for three years. They were expecting a daughter when her partner was killed in a motor vehicle accident. Hooper Law’s advocacy resulted in the Court finding that the woman fit into the arguably unclear definitions of “spouse” in the applicable legislation, allowing her to be compensated for the life-changing loss of her partner, even though their daughter had not yet been born: Romanoski Estate v. Seburn
K.T. v. Denis Vranich, Elixir and Paradise lane Developments, Hamilton Inc. A case in which the defendant, Vranich sexually assaulted a young employee of his nightclub, Elixir. Vranich had used his financial control over her as an employer to isolate her from her peers and block any path of escape while he sexually violated her. Vranich was found liable and Elixir vicariously liable for the conduct of Vranich. There was no liability found with respect to Paradise Lane Developments. The Judge awarded the Plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) $125,000 for pain and suffering, $25,000 for punitive damages, $75,000 for loss of earning capacity, $26,000 for future therapy costs and $48,753 for legal costs. The judgment stands out because the award for pain and suffering is among the highest level in Ontario. Also, punitive damages being awarded against the corporation (who were vicariously liable) is a first in Ontario.
Muir v. City of Brantford - May 7, 2010 A case in which the Plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) was rendered a quadriplegic after losing control of his bike in an attempt to avoid two pedestrians traveling towards him off the side of the bike trail located along the Grand River in the City of Brantford. The trail had little to no recovery zone at the area where the incident happened, in addition to the presence of loose rocks and boulders. The Plaintiff brought an action against the City of Brantford alleging that the City acted with reckless disregard in designing, building and maintaining the trail and thereby breached a duty owed to him. The failure of the City’s inspection system to notice and address unraveling pavement and the presence of loose rocks and boulders in such a dangerous location on the trail was considered “reckless disregard.” The City, however, was found to have shown no “reckless disregard” with regards to the location of the trail or the standards in designing the trail. The Plaintiff was found 60% contributorily negligent for the incident. The Judge awarded the Plaintiff $1,116,220.70.
Bain v. Black & Decker - A case in which the defendant, Black & Decker denied any liability for the electrical shock caused by their hairdryer to Ms. Bain. The Judge found that the Plaintiff, Beverly Bain (represented by Rob Hooper), was injured by a Black & Decker hairdryer which was manufactured improperly. The Judge accepted the claims made by Beverly Bain from a physical point of view and awarded her damages for the injuries caused by the defective hairdryer.
Watson v. Gavin - A case in which the defendant tried to get the plaintiff’s claim for damages dismissed. The judge found that the plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) had suffered severe and permanent damage to an important function, and his claim was allowed to continue.
Tournay v. Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company - A case in which the plaintiff’s insurance company denied she was catastrophically injured, and was therefore not entitled to certain benefits. At an arbitration, Rob Hooper (for the plaintiff) succeeded in showing that the plaintiff’s injuries were catastrophic.
Toth v. Hollingworth - A case in which the plaintiffs (represented by Rob Hooper) requested that another person be named as a defendant in addition to Hollingworth, even though the time limitation for filing a lawsuit had expired. The plaintiffs were successful.
Waddington v. Niagara North Condominium Corp. No.125 - A case in which Niagara North Condominiums applied for an order requiring Ms Waddington (represented by Rob Hooper) to remove two cats from her apartment. The application was dismissed because it was almost identical to a previous application (which was also dismissed). Ms Waddington was awarded legal costs.
Waddington v. Niagara North Condominium Corp. No.125 (Appeal) - An appeal by Niagara North Condominiums to the above ruling. Their appeal was dismissed. Again, Ms Waddington (represented by Rob Hooper) was awarded legal costs.
Lammie v. Gizzarelli - The ruling of a judge stating that the plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) had suffered a serious, important and permanent impairment of her psychological ability to drive a vehicle. The claim was therefore allowed to continue.
Gardiner v. Fagan - The ruling of a judge stating that the plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) had suffered injuries in a car crash, resulting in chronic pain that seriously impaired her ability to work and carry on everyday life. The claim was therefore allowed to continue.
Epifano v. The Corporation of the City of Hamilton - A costs endorsement in which a judge awarded the plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) $18,000 in legal costs.
Cartner V. Burlington (City) and Crystal Shoes A case in which the Plaintiff, was injured as a result of a slip and fall. She slipped on a muddy concrete slurry substance that had pooled on the sidewalk just outside the store known as Crystal Shoes. As a result of the fall, she suffered a severe fracture of her right femur. Both defendants were found liable. Crystal Shoes was found liable in negligence to the Plaintiff because they owed a duty of ca5e to prevent injury to those using the sidewalk from substances emanating from his property. The City was found liable since it failed to keep the sidewalk in a reasonable stat of repair and since that failure was a cause of the accident and the damages sustained by the Plaintiff. The Judge awarded the Plaintiff (represented by Rob Hooper) $120,000 for pain and suffering, $171,000 for loss of past and future earnings capacity. The Judge awarded the Plaintiff’s husband $20,000 for loss of care, guidance and companionship.
CONTACT US TO FIGHT FOR YOU
For a free, no commitment initial consultation, please call our fight for you help-line at 905-522-8002.View More
Don’t wait to contact us. Time is important following an accident or incident.View More