Toronto Metro News – Legal Matters

Posted by on April 28, 2014 under News, Our Firm Comments are off for this article

Critical injury lawyer John McLeishInterview with: John McLeish, McLeish Orlando LLP member of the Personal Injury Alliance

Published in: The Toronto Metro News Newspaper April 23, 2014 issue

Legal Matters

What to expect in personal injury cases

Q: Is there any chance of a quick settlement in a personal injury case where someone has been catastrophically injured?

Read more of this article »

Road Warriors

Posted by on April 23, 2014 under Our Firm Comments are off for this article

Patrick Brown personal injury lawyer

By: Patrick Brown, McLeish Orlando LLP

Published in: Precedent Magazine, Spring 2014 issue 

Toronto has one of the highest collision rates per capita for cyclists of any large Canadian city. More than 1,000 bicycle riders are injured in Toronto each year — and the real figure is much higher, since an estimated 80 percent go unreported. (Our province isn’t doing so well either: roughly 26,000 Ontarians wind up in the ER each year due to cycling accidents.)

As a critical injury lawyer who works with victims of cycling accidents and their families, I’ve had a front-row seat to the aftermath of these collisions. The devastating impact these cases have on victims’ loved ones goes far beyond what the statistics report. And there’s a tragedy of an even wider scope: so much could be done to prevent both minor injuries and fatalities on bikes. Our city and province know what these things are, but without the threat of lawsuits, our governments are reluctant to invest money in cycling safety.

Read more of this article »

Insurers should not rely on social programs

Posted by on March 27, 2014 under Our Firm Comments are off for this article

Patrick Brown personal injury lawyer

By: Patrick Brown, McLeish Orlando LLP

Published in: The Lawyers Weekly Mar. 28, 2014 issue

When a child or adult suffers a severe traumatic brain injury or spinal cord injury, the costs for care into the future are significant. Failure to adequately address the needs of a severely disabled client through medical evidence and a solid life care plan can have a disastrous impact on the case. Since the needs are for a lifetime, many items equate to high figures.

Traditionally, the insurer and defence counsel have contested the care costs items on the basis that the specific item being sought is either not needed to the extent asserted, is unreasonable, or the market rates are much lower.   Read more of this article »

Cyclists, Mind The Gap

Posted by on March 19, 2014 under Community, Cycling, Our Firm, Safety Comments are off for this article

 

pothole-web preview

Photo Credit: I Bike TO

With the start of spring and my return to commuting by bike to work, the potholes that rattled my car are now more than a mere inconvenience.  Aside from falling after hitting a pothole, the more concerning risk is swerving to avoid a pothole and not checking for approaching cars.  The possibility of a car swerving into a cyclist is an equally realistic concern.  Although a sharp lookout is the best defence, the city has a duty to repair potholes, and typically will fix them if they are over a specific size within 4 days. Read more of this article »

Ontario proposes beefed up penalties for distracted driving

Posted by on under Accident Prevention, Automobile Insurance, Insurance Companies, News, Our Firm, Safety Comments are off for this article

Patrick Brown personal injury lawyer

Patrick Brown, Partner of McLeish Orlando was featured in yesterday’s Canadian Press article on Advocate Daily discussing the distracted driving legislation, he told Advocate Daily, “There’s still more to be done, but it’s a good step to implement this new legislation as it relates to distracted driving, especially in light of all the developments that have happened over the years with personal devises and in-car distractions.” To read the full article click here

It’s not what’s missing, it’s what’s there: Day 1 of the Paralympics in Sochi!

Posted by on March 7, 2014 under Community, News, Our Firm Comments are off for this article

The Paralympic games have officially begun!  Canadian athletes will again take to the ice and slopes in Sochi, hoping to bring back the gold to Canada. The Paralympic sports that Canadians will be partaking in are: alpine skiing, biathlon, cross-country skiing, para-snowboarding, wheel chair curling and the all-time favourite, sledge hockey.  Read more of this article »

How to Best Leverage the Use of Surveillance and Investigation in Court Part 3

Posted by on January 20, 2014 under Court Procedures, Our Firm Comments are off for this article

This is the final post in our series of “How to Best Leverage the Use of Surveillance and Investigation in Court”. In the previous posts we discussed obligations regarding the surveillance and investigative material before , during and after examinations, and before trial. In this blog post you will learn the final steps of using surveillance at trial.

USE OF SURVEILLANCE AT TRIAL

1. Using Privileged documents as Substantive Evidence

If a defendant wishes to use surveillance or investigative material as substantive evidence at trial, the defendant must comply with Rule 30.09, which sets out strict procedural requirements.  Read more of this article »

How to Best Leverage the Use of Surveillance and Investigation in Court Part 2

Posted by on January 13, 2014 under Court Procedures, Our Firm Comments are off for this article

Last week we looked at the defendants disclosure obligations regarding surveillance and investigative material where a claim of privilege has been made, in this weeks post we will look into using surveillance at the examination for discovery, after discovers and before trial.

II) At the Examination for Discovery

In order to obtain the particulars of surveillance before the plaintiff’s discovery, the plaintiff should endeavor to be the first to deliver a notice of examination.   By doing so, the plaintiff can take advantage of Rule 31.04(3). This rule states that the party who first serves a notice of examination “may examination first and complete the examination before being examined by another party, unless the court orders otherwise”. Read more of this article »

How to Best Leverage the Use of Surveillance and Investigation in Court Part 1

Posted by on January 6, 2014 under Court Procedures, Our Firm Comments are off for this article

This is Part 1 of a 3 part series on how to best leverage the use of surveillance and investigation in court through a plaintiff’s perspective.

surveillanceSurveillance of an injured plaintiff is a common tactic used by defense counsel to defend personal injury actions.  More recently, in addition to traditional video surveillance, on-line investigations are now being conducted of plaintiffs. Surveillance and on-line investigation is conducted at a variety of times throughout the litigation and it is impossible for a plaintiff’s lawyer to predict exactly when it will be done.   This blog will discuss the defendant’s pre-trial disclosure obligations as it relates to video surveillance and on-line investigation, the use of this material at trial and helpful strategies plaintiff’s counsel can employ to obtain the particulars of this investigative material in advance of trial.

DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE

Below is a discussion of the defendant’s disclosure obligations regarding surveillance and investigative material where a claim of privilege has been made.

I) Before examinations for discovery

The term “document” is defined broadly by Rule 30.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to include “a sound recording, videotape, film, photograph, chart, graph, map, plan, survey, book of account, and data and information in electronic form”. As a result, the rules governing disclosure and production of documents apply equally to surveillance and investigative material.

Rule 30.02(1) requires a party to disclose “every document relevant to any matter in issue in an action…whether or not privileged is claimed in respect of the document.” Rule 30.02(2) imposes a further requirement that all relevant documents be produced unless privileged is claimed over the document.

Rule 30.03 requires every party to an action to serve an affidavit of documents disclosing “to the full extent of the party’s knowledge, information, and belief” all documents that are (a) relevant to any matter in issue in the action and (b) are or have been in the party’s possession, control or power.   Any investigative reports and surveillance obtained before discovery must be disclosed in the defendant’s affidavit of documents. In most cases, the defendant will claim privilege over these documents, such that they must be listed in Schedule “B”.

To learn if surveillance or on-line investigation has been undertaken before discovery, a plaintiff should always require a defendant to deliver a sworn and certified affidavit of documents, or at a minimum, a draft affidavit of documents, in advance of examinations for discovery.  Sometimes a defendant will use boiler plate wording to set out the documents under Schedule “B”. If there is any concern over what may be contained in Schedule “B”, counsel may insist on a particularized Schedule “B”, with a list and description of every document together with the grounds for the claim of privilege.

As internet investigation of the plaintiff is now being conducted by the defendant, counsel should be aware that the disclosure obligations under the Rules above include any electronic documentation, including those obtained from the internet. While an investigator’s report which may accompany this material would satisfy a claim for privilege, the actual documents obtained (ie. photographs from Facebook or postings from twitter) ought to be listed in Schedule “A”, as these documents would not satisfy the elements to establish litigation privilege.    In Leduc v. Roman[1], the court clearly held that online content is “data and information in electronic form” producible as “documents” under the Rules.   As a result, relevant documents obtained from the internet must be identified in the defendant’s affidavit of documents.

Come back next week when we discuss “At the Examination for Discovery

 

[1] [2009] CanLII 6838 (Ont.S.C.)

McLeish Orlando Donates 500 Turkeys to Toronto’s Daily Bread Food Bank

Posted by on December 20, 2013 under Community, Our Firm Comments are off for this article

This morning McLeish Orlando announced their donation of 500 turkeys to help the Daily Bread Food Bank and their mission to fight against hunger here in our city.

Follow @DailyBreadTO to learn more about the fight against hunger and tune into City TVJohn Pat and Frankie 1John Pat and Frankie 2

John McLeish and Patrick Brown with Frankie Ferragine, Breakfast TelevisionJohn, Pat, Alison, Daily Bank Rep

John McLeish, Alison Burrison, Gail Nyberg, ED, Daily Bread Food Bank and Patrick Brown

McLeish Orlando would like to wish everyone a safe and happy holiday season and best wishes for 2014.