Posted On: February 19, 2010

What does “Surveillance” Have To Do With the Boy Scouts?

"I always feel like somebody's watching me."

Remember that song from the 80's one hit wonder Rockwell? It's one that many claimants in personal injury claims feel like singing.

Secretly Watching You

In many serious injury cases the insurance company that represents the defendant will hire a private investigator to follow you and secretly video you going about your normal daily activities.

Why Do They Do This?

There are two reasons why insurance companies do this:

1. To see if your injuries are genuine. Do you walk with a limp? Do you need to use a cane? Do you have difficulty bending over or kneeling down? Problems lifting your groceries out of your trunk? In other words, is it obvious to anyone looking at you that you have suffered a serious injury?
2. Ammunition: To try to get information that can be used to defend or minimize your claim. Say for example the private investigator gets videotape of you taking your garbage to the curb in the morning. Perhaps they videotape you mowing your law or trying to shovel your sidewalk. Maybe looking at the video you don't appear to be hurting all that much.

The Problem With Surveillance

What videotape doesn’t show is what happens behind closed doors: the hours that you spend laying down because the physical activity has aggravated your injuries.

How Surveillance Can Be Used Against You

Surveillance can be very damaging to the plaintiff who hasn't been properly prepared for discoveries. The insurance company’s lawyer may ask: “So tell me what kind of things your injuries prevent you from doing? Are you able to take out the garbage?”

An unprepared plaintiff might say “No, I can’t take out the garbage.”

Now what she really means is “...taking out the garbage aggravates my pain, sometimes I have to take medication and lay on the couch for hours waiting for the pain to subside. So I try to avoid taking out the garbage whenever I can.”

Unfortunately, it takes too long to say all that so the unprepared plaintiff just says: “No, I can’t take out the garbage”. Then the insurance company’s lawyer plays the video of you taking out the garbage and all of a sudden you look like a liar.

Surveillance More Common

When I first started practicing as a lawyer I used to do insurance defence work. Surveillance video was rarely used back then. But now I see surveillance video used routinely in almost every serious injury claim.

Boy Scout Motto

That’s why I tell all of my clients that they should act like boy scouts and be prepared.

Be prepared for the fact that the insurance company may have you under surveillance.

Be prepared to give your evidence at discovery.

Be prepared for your testimony at trial.

Free Report

That’s why I have prepared a report that I give to all of my clients well in advance of the discovery telling them what they need to do to prepare to give their evidence.

You can get a free copy of the report “10 Tips to Prepare for your Discovery Examination” by contacting my through this blog.



Bookmark and Share

Posted On: February 19, 2010

Brain Injury Claims Will Continue Until Helmets Mandatory

Fashion is preventing skiers and snowboarders from wearing helmets...and it's putting them at risk of brain injury according to a Toronto neurosurgeon.

The Journal of the American Medical Association published a commentary this week from Dr. Michael Cusimano, a neurosurgeon at St. Michael’s Hospital:

"Despite compelling evidence that shows wearing a helmet significantly reduces the chance of head and brain injury, there are still those who argue that helmets are not fashionable or part of the ski culture," wrote Cusimano.

There are certain sporting activities that are known to have a higher incidence of traumatic brain injury:

* Bicycling
* Skateboarding
* Rollerblading (Inline Skating)

In most jurisdictions it's now mandatory to wear helmets when doing any of these activities. People accept that it's just common sense.

Skier-carving-a-turn.jpg

Skiers and snowboarders are still resisting mandatory helmet use.

More than 120,000 people suffer head injuries every year in North America while skiing or snowboarding. Recent studies have shown that helmets help reduce the risk of head injuries by up to 60 per cent. Two weeks ago I posted about a similar Canadian study: Brain Injury Leading Cause of Death and Serious Injury for Skiers and Snowboarders

People are going to continue to suffer head injuries and traumatic brain injury claims are going to continue to be filed in the courts. But if the injured person wasn't wearing a helmet, you can expect defence lawyers to be more successful with claims of contributory negligence: that the injured person contributed to their brain injury because they refused to wear a helmet.

What do think? Should helmets be mandatory for skiers and snowboarders?

Continue reading " Brain Injury Claims Will Continue Until Helmets Mandatory " »

Bookmark and Share

Posted On: February 12, 2010

What is "Hearsay"?

Hearsay is a term lawyers use to describe statements made by someone who is not in court to testify about what they heard. For example, if you were testifying in trial, you could say: “I saw the car drive through the read light” because you are testifying about something you actually saw happen.

On the other hand, if you said: “Bob told me that he saw the car drive through the red light” that would be hearsay, because Bob isn’t in court to testify about what he saw.

Inadmissible Evidence

Hearsay is not admissible in court because the person who made the statement isn’t available to testify or be cross examined. Also a judge or a jury hearing the evidence can't see the witness to judge their credibility.

Exceptions to the Rule

Over the years judges in various cases have allowed exceptions to the hearsay rule to the point where there were literally dozens of generally accepted situations where hearsay could be admitted.

The Supreme Court of Canada tried to make some sense of the hearsay in a case called R. v. Smith. In Smith the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a judge could admit hearsay when two criteria are met:

1.Necessity;
2.Reliability.

Necessity can be established when there is no other way for the evidence to be put before the court. For example, the original witness who made the statement has died.

Reliability is established when the court is satisfied that, given the circumstances that existed at the time the statement was made, the statement is likely to be reliable. For example, a statement made by a witness to the police in the course of a criminal investigation.

Before you testify at trial your lawyer will go through your evidence with you and explain what evidence will be admissible and what evidence will not be admissible because it is hearsay.

Bookmark and Share

Posted On: February 10, 2010

Experts in Personal Injury Claims

"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field."
Niels Bohr

Witnesses in a personal injury claim trial, or any trial for that matter, are only allowed to testify to facts. However, in some circumstances a witness may be allowed to offer an opinion. Only witnesses that have been accepted by the court as an expert in their field can offer their opinion.

Who Can Be An Expert?

Almost anyone can be qualified as an expert if they have special knowledge in a certain field that the average person doesn’t have.

Personal Injury Claims

However, there are certain experts that routinely testify in personal injury claims:

Doctors: Your doctor and any of the specialist that have treated you will normally testify about the nature of your injuries, the symptoms you exhibited, the treatment they administered and their prognosis (their opinion) as to how your injuries will effect you in the future.

Physiotherapists: Your physiotherapist will testify about the treatment you needed and that you will need to get in order to fully recover from your injuries.

Occupational Therapists: Will testify about the limitations that your injuries have caused and how they impact your ability to work or perform your normal day to day activities.

Actuaries or Economists: Will testify about how much income you have lost to the date of trial, how your injuries will effect your ability to earn income in the future, and calculate the cost of your ongoing medical rehabilitation expenses.

Future Care Planners: Will provide their opinion about what types of aids you require or expenses you are going to have to hire people to help you with your normal day to day activities.

Each of the experts that testify on your behalf will bring special knowlege to the case in order to help prove a different aspect of the damages or losses that you have suffered as a result of your injuries.

Continue reading " Experts in Personal Injury Claims " »

Bookmark and Share

Posted On: February 9, 2010

Brain Injury Leading Cause of Death and Serious Injury for Skiers and Snowboarders

A new study from the University of Calgary has found that wearing a helmet while skiing or snowboarding reduces the risk of head injuries by 35%>.

A report in the latest in the latest Canadian Medical Association Journal reported that traumatic brain injury is the leading cause of death and serious injury to skiers and snowboarders. Studies have found that between 2 and 5 of every 10 traumatic brain injuries could have been prevented by wearing a helmet.

Ski Industry Rejects Calls for Mandatory Helmet Use

CBC News quoted Jason Crawford, the manager of Crabbe Mountain Ski Hill near Fredericton as saying:

“I don’t think we’re at the point where we need to make it a law, to make it mandatory. People should be allowed to make those decisions for themselves.”
Helmet use is becoming more popular and Crawford said that close to 80% of skiers on Crabbe Mountain were wearing them this year. But there are still people who refuse to adopt the simple measures to prevent traumatic brain injury.

Doctor Charles Tator is the founder of Think First, a non-profit organization dedicated to education and prevention of brain and spinal cord injuries, has called for a “no helmet, no lift ticket” policy. A move that the skiing industry has resisted to date.

On the one hand you will have skiers who don’t want to have their freedom interfered with. On the other hand, the public has to pay the enormous medical costs for people who have suffered catastrophic brain injuries.

So what do you think? Should skiers have a right to ski without helmets? Or should they be required to wear helmets for their own safety?

Bookmark and Share