Sentences with phrase «diminished earning»

In my view, the refusal of the trial judge to permit the defendants to adduce evidence to challenge the plaintiff's physical abilities at the date of the trial was unfair, and given the importance of this evidence to the ultimate award of damages for future diminished earning capacity and future cost of care, I see no alternative but to order a new trial on damages.

We make sure that our clients» injuries are documented and understood, that the medical expenses are clearly delineated, that any lost wage or diminished earning capacity is fully supported, and that ongoing permanent impairment and harm is properly evaluated and presented so that our clients» future losses are factored into the analysis of case value.

Reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Court of Appeal upholding an award for diminished earning capacity based on «common sense ``.

You could receive reimbursement for medical expenses, rehabilitation costs, diminished earning capacity, lost income, property damage, and pain and suffering.

Mr. Justice Brown awarded the Plaintiff over $ 1.4 million in total compensation including $ 1 million for her diminished earning capacity over her lifetime.

Tags: bc injury law, diminished earning capacity, Glasgow Coma Scale, Glasgow Coma Score, Madam Justice Morrison, Madill v. Sithivong, mild traumatic brain injury, MTBI, surveillance, video surveillance Posted in ICBC Head Injury Cases, ICBC Privacy Issues, ICBC Wage Loss, Uncategorized Direct Link Comments Off top ^

In addition to non-pecuniary damages, $ 150,000 was awarded for the Plaintiff's diminished earning capacity.

ICBC»S lawyer argued that the Court should adopt the earnings approach when determining an amount for diminished earning capacity, whereas counsel for the Plaintiff argued that the capital asset approach was the proper method.

In determining diminished earning capacity, the Court elected to adopt the earnings approach, rather than the capital asset approach.

In Crevier v. Thompson, the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident, and commenced an ICBC claim for many types of damages, including pain and suffering, and diminished earning capacity.

Rather than using the earnings approach for the purposes of determining an amount to award the Plaintiff for diminished earning capacity, the Court adopted the capital asset approach, as set out in Brown v. Golaiy.

In Arletto v. Kin, the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident, and consequently sued for damages for pain and suffering, income loss, and diminished earning capacity.

The Court did not accept the Plaintiff «s claims for diminished earning capacity, however did award a substantial sum of money for diminished housekeeping capacity.

In dismissing the appeal, the Court determined that there was evidence upon which the trial judge could reasonably make the award that was made for diminished earning capacity, and that the award was not unreasonable or wholly erroneous.

General damages (money for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life) were assessed at $ 65,000 and a further $ 80,000 was awarded for the Plaintiff's diminished earning capacity to reflect the fact that her chronic condition will likely effect her vocationally over her lifetime.

Rather than attempting to determine an amount for diminished earning capacity by using the earnings approach, which is more suitable where the loss can be easily measured, the Court used the capital asset approach, as the Plaintiff had no history of full time employment, and had yet to fully establish herself in her field.

The Court chose to adopt the capital asset approach in determining an amount to award for diminished earning capacity, rather than the earnings approach, which is typically used when the future income loss is more easily measurable on a quantifiable basis.

The Court, after also factoring in contingencies such as a disruption in the Plaintiff's career due to maternity leave, awarded the Plaintiff $ 290,000.00 in diminished earning capacity.

In Rollheiser v. Rollheiser, the Plaintiff was injured in a car accident, and brought an ICBC claim for several heads of damages, including pain and suffering, loss of income, diminished earning capacity, cost of future care, and loss of housekeeping capacity.

The Plaintiff brought an ICBC claim for several heads of damages, including pain and suffering, loss of income, diminished earning capacity, cost of future care, and loss of housekeeping capacity.

The earnings approach is typically used by the Court when a quantifiable, mathematical calculation is the easiest means to arrive at an amount for diminished earning capacity.

In Ostrikoff v. Oliveira, the Plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident, and brought an ICBC claim for many types of damages, such as non-pecuniary damages, past loss of earning capacity, and future diminished earning capacity.

The Plaintiff brought ICBC claims for both, seeking damages for pain and suffering, wage loss, diminished earning capacity, homemaking and child care costs, and future care.

In the case at bar, the Court preferred the «earnings approach» in determining diminished earning capacity, over the «capital asset» approach, as the «earnings approach» is more helpful when the loss is easily measurable.

ICBC»S lawyer argued that there should be a cut off point with respect to damages, including diminished earning capacity, of seven and a half years after the motor vehicle accident, and argued that an award of only $ 94,500.00 should be awarded for diminished earning capacity.

This can include a claim for pain and suffering, for out of pocket expenses, for loss of housekeeping capacity, for future loss of housekeeping capacity, for loss of income and past diminished earning capacity, for future diminished earning capacity, for cost of future care, and for an in - trust claim.

If a family member or loved one has suffered a frontal lobe injury, we may be able to file suit on their behalf in order to recover financial compensation to cover the costs of medical bills, future treatment, lost wages, and can even seek compensation for things such as pain and suffering, a diminished earning capacity, and more.

In Suthakar v. Humble, the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident, and consequently commenced legal proceedings, seeking damages for pain and suffering and various other types of damages, including diminished earning capacity.

In addition to awarding damages for pain and suffering, the Court also awarded two years» worth of income for diminished earning capacity to reflect the Plaintiff's delayed graduation.

In Symons v. ICBC, the Plaintiff was seriously injured in a motor vehicle accident, and consequently commenced legal proceedings, seeking damages for pain and suffering, income loss, loss of housekeeping capacity, diminished earning capacity, cost of future care, and out of pocket expenses.

In Chow v. Nolan, the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision, and consequently brought an ICBC claim for many heads of damages, including pain and suffering, diminished earning capacity, and loss of housekeeping capacity.

Counsel for the Plaintiff adduced an expert report with respect to diminished earning capacity, with the report primarily based on assumptions that the expert was asked to make by counsel for the Plaintiff.

Counsel for the Plaintiff argued that the Court should adopt the earnings approach, rather than the capital asset approach, in determining an award for diminished earning capacity.

Rather than using the earnings approach in an attempt to quantify diminished earning capacity, the Court adopted the other accepted approach, that being the capital asset approach, as quantification of diminished earning capacity was not easily measurable.

ICBC»S lawyer acknowledged that the Plaintiff would be limited to sedentary or part - time work, and would require accommodations, however argued that an award of $ 200,000.00 for diminished earning capacity would be more appropriate.

The Court cited previous case law for the proposition that the assessment of diminished earning capacity must be based on the totality of the evidence, rather than a purely mathematical calculation, and that the Plaintiff should be put in the position he or she would have been without the injuries caused by the negligence of the Defendant.

Other types of damages can include medical expenses incurred, lost wages, a diminished earning capacity, loss of consortium, etc..

In addition, diminished earning capacity can be a proper element of the damages that a personal injury victim can recover.

The Plaintiff commenced legal proceedings, seeking non-pecuniary damages, past diminished earning capacity, special damages, diminished earning capacity into the future, and the cost of future care.

In Russell v. Parks, the Plaintiff was injured in a car accident, and brought an ICBC claim for several heads of damages, including pain and suffering, cost of future care, diminished earning capacity, and past diminished earning capacity.

You can also seek compensation for any ongoing medical expenses, as well as compensation for missed wages and diminished earning capacity.

Despite this, the Court still awarded the Plaintiff $ 95,000.00 for past diminished earning capacity.

In Combs v. Bergen, the Plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision, and brought an ICBC claim against the Defendant for damages for pain and suffering, wage loss, diminished earning capacity, and cost of future.

The Court would eventually award $ 21,000.00 for past diminished earning capacity, before reducing this amount to account for social assistance benefits that the Plaintiff had already received.

In awarding $ 125,000 for the Plaintiff's diminished earning capacity Mr. Justice Grist engaged in the following useful analysis:

Victims of catastrophic injuries may be entitled to compensation for these medical costs, as well as lost wages, diminished earning capacity and the effect the injury has on their quality of life.

The Plaintiff asked the Court to award substantial damages including an award for diminished earning capacity.

In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $ 40,000 and dismissing the claim for diminished earning capacity Madam Justice Dillon provided the following reasons:

Your attorney may retain an economic expert to determine the value of your diminished earning capacity over the course of your lifetime.

The Plaintiff brought an ICBC claim for non-pecuniary damages, loss of income, diminished earning capacity, loss of housekeeping capacity, special damages, and future care.