If you're involved in a personal injury case that goes to litigation, you'll likely have to give a deposition. This can be a stressful experience, but understanding the process and being well-prepared can make a big difference. Let's break down what a deposition is, what to expect, and how to put your best foot forward.

What is a Deposition?

A deposition is part of the discovery phase in a lawsuit. It's an opportunity for both sides to gather evidence and learn more about the case. During a deposition, you'll answer questions under oath about the accident, your injuries, and how they've impacted your life.

The Deposition Process

• Who's Present: Typically, you, your lawyer, a court reporter, and the opposing lawyer(s) will be present.
• Duration: Depositions can last several hours, depending on the complexity of the case.
• Format: The opposing lawyer will ask you questions, and your answers will be recorded by the court reporter.
• Importance: Your deposition testimony can significantly impact the outcome of your case, so it's crucial to take it seriously.

Preparing for Your Deposition

Your lawyer will play a key role in preparing you for your deposition. They will:

• Explain the Process: Your lawyer will walk you through what to expect and help you understand the types of questions you might be asked.
• Review the Facts: You'll go over the details of the accident, your injuries, and your medical treatment.
• Practice Q&A: Your lawyer may conduct mock questioning to help you feel more comfortable and confident.

Tips for a Successful Deposition

• Tell the Truth: Always be honest and accurate in your answers.
• Listen Carefully: Pay close attention to the questions and ask for clarification if needed.
• Answer Clearly and Concisely: Don't ramble or speculate. Stick to the facts.
• Stay Calm: It's natural to feel nervous, but try to remain calm and composed.
• Take Breaks: If you need a break, don't hesitate to ask.

Remember: Your deposition is an opportunity to tell your story and present your case in the best possible light. By working closely with your lawyer and following these tips, you can approach your deposition with confidence.

Have Questions? Contact Iacobelli Law Firm Today!

If you're facing a deposition in a personal injury case, we're here to help. Our experienced team will guide you through the process and ensure your rights are protected. Contact us today for a free consultation.

Disclaimer: This blog post is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified attorney for guidance on your specific legal situation.

Check out our latest YouTube video where dog bite injury lawyers, Colton Leung and Andrew Iacobelli, sit down to discuss your rights following a dog bite injury.  Below is a summary of the video contents, or you can view it now above. 

Andrew: Today we're going to talk about what your rights and remedies are if you are unfortunately injured by a dog. We all love dogs. Lots of us in the office here have dogs and most dog owners are really responsible and dogs are great pets but occasionally dogs do cause some harm, injury or loss. 

Understanding Strict Liability in Dog Bite Cases
Colton: Generally speaking in a lot of jurisdictions there's something known as strict liability which essentially means that the individual who was bitten by a dog, they don't have to prove that the owner was negligent in handling the dog, but instead it is deemed that the owner is at fault to begin with.
Andrew: Yeah, and that's really important for victims. Ordinarily in a personal injury matter, the injured party has to prove that there was a duty, that the duty was breached, and that that breach resulted in some harm, injury, or loss. 
Strict liability, which applies to certain circumstances including dog bites, like you mentioned, really helps the victim sort of streamline the process and really focus on damages. But, of course, you need to know the owner of the dog and unlike cars and vehicles that are registered and there are plates and licenses and all this stuff that makes it easy for your lawyers to find out who the owner of the car that hit you is. In dog bites, one of the challenges that we often have is, who owned the dog?

Immediate Steps After a Dog Bite
Andrew: Why don't you talk about some of the things that the victim of a dog bite should do immediately to help them bring a claim for their losses or their injuries. 
Colton: Of course, so it's very important to get name, contact details, address if you're able to, and also to notify the authorities, for example, animal control, so that they can do investigations or to document who the dog owner is to make sure that all its vaccines are up to date, and to also document who's responsible for taking care of the dog.

Importance of Vaccination Records in Dog Bite Accidents
Andrew: You brought up a good point with the vaccines. So it's important to notify authorities not only to preserve your right to potentially bring a claim, but also rabies is the big one. And even though rabies is extremely rare, the authorities, the first thing they would kind of want to know is the veterinary records.
We've had cases, unfortunately, where the person who owned the dog has left the scene. Unfortunately, if they're unable to locate the dog and obtain the vaccination records from the veterinarian, like in this case, this poor individual was forced to undergo treatment for rabies just to protect them in the event that that dog wasn't vaccinated.
So, it's basically adding insult to injury. Someone who's already been bitten by a dog or attacked by a dog. And now on top of that, they have to undergo treatment that maybe, probably wouldn't be necessary if they had access to proof that this dog was vaccinated against rabies. 

Insurance and Liability when a Dog Attacks
Andrew: Now, who pays? Like, okay, so in a car, and I'm just always comparing it to cars, because I think most people are familiar with what happens at a car accident.
We all know motor vehicles by and large are supposed to be insured. Who pays the damages or the losses when a dog attacks someone? 

Colton: So the dog owner's homeowner's insurance or their tenant insurance, uh, if they're a tenant would generally cover incidents where their dog has bitten another individual. 
Andrew: So that's why it's also important to identify who the owner is and their address because ultimately probably would proceed against the homeowner's insurance policy. Generally it doesn't matter if it happened on their property. 
Colton: As long as they had control of the dog at that time, their homeowner's insurance should respond to it. 

Common Dog Bite Injuries
Andrew: What kind of injuries…
Colton: Are typical dog bites? Well, again, it can range. It can be a little scratch on your arm or your leg, deeper lacerations, teeth puncture holes, requiring stitches. There's instances when skin grafting is required as well if, you know, a chunk of skin is missing unfortunately. And of course, the worst case scenario is someone unfortunately passes away because they've been mauled to death by a dog. 
Other injuries that we typically see include psychological injuries such as Which is, you know, anxiety, depression, more so anxiety and PTSD. So it's very important to not only let your medical professionals know your physical injuries, but you should also voice your concerns in terms of your psychological injuries as well as they're not visible and they're not easily documented unless you voice your concerns to your medical professional.

Dog Breeds and Bite Incidents
Colton: So Andrew, what kind of dog breeds do you usually see in dog bite incidents? 
Andrew: I don't think it's so much a specific breed. Certainly more serious injuries come from larger breed dogs when they attack just because they're more physically powerful and stronger and can inflict greater injury typically. We see a lot of injuries from Just about all breeds, but I think frequently we see injuries from German Shepherds and Huskies.
Colton: We also get a lot of cases where it's smaller breeds that have, you know, bitten our client. 

Responsible Dog Ownership and Preventing Dog Bite Injuries
Andrew: Yeah, there are certain breeds that probably require greater training and handling. Our experience helping people who have been injured because of dog bites also reminds us you have to be a responsible dog owner. If you, if you, you know, if you have a larger, stronger breed, you should work with that dog. That dog requires training and obedience and socialization because I think most dog bites from what we see could be avoided if the owner had more experience in handling that dog or avoided certain situations where they knew the dog was vulnerable. 

Sometimes we find out after, once we were involved in the case, it wasn't the first time that it exhibited aggression in a certain setting and the person ignored it. It's not fair to the person that was hurt because they never warned them. Sometimes you see people get hurt in social settings, kids getting hurt at birthday parties or play dates. The owners of the dog knew that maybe this dog wasn't the best around kids but kind of ignored it.

It's really, um, a reminder to be a responsible owner. As much as you love your pet, be responsible. Don't put other people at risk unnecessarily. 

Victim's Role and Precautions
Andrew: What about the victim themselves? Because the dog owners will often blame the victim. What do you have to say about that? Where the dog owner is, is blaming the victim for, you know, maybe approaching the dog, petting the dog. Getting their face in the dog's face, things like this, which are some of the things that we commonly hear. 
Colton: So, I think it's very important for individuals before they even, you know, touch the dog or approach the dog to perhaps ask for consent from the dog owners because you don't know whether or not a dog is friendly to begin with, and if you approach the owner and they allow you to, chances are the owners know that their dog is well behaved and wouldn't bite.

Andrew: But also in terms of that scenario, it's also important for the victim to know that because most dog bite cases are strict liability, you know, you petting the dog or you maybe getting too close to the dog without permission isn't going to insulate the owner from liability, meaning you'll still have a viable cause of action. You'll still have a viable claim.

But just to protect yourself, like you said, if it's not your dog, give the dog its space. Don't approach it without the owners and maybe getting the owner to supervise the dog while you pet it. 

How Much is a Dog Bite Case Worth?
Andrew: Another common question we get from clients is how much is a dog bite case worth?
And like any personal injury case, it's going to be very fact specific. The severity of the injury is going to play into it. Whether or not there's scarring, permanent disfigurement, where it is. Obviously a scar to someone's face would probably attract greater value than a scar somewhere that's going to be covered like the upper thigh.

And then the impact on the person's life. So is it a permanent disfigurement? Is there any kind of permanent impairment? The pain and suffering the person has gone through? The type of healthcare that was necessary because of the incident? All comes into play. 

To answer that question, what's a dog bite worth? It could be worth anywhere from a really modest amount of money if it's a very insignificant modest injury to, to six figures to obviously, you know, if it's more serious even beyond that. 
Colton: And it's usually a relatively short period of time. Um, insurance companies, I think out of all the personal injury cases that we have, I think assuming that there is an insurance company responding to, uh, dog bites are the fastest. personal injury cases that we resolve. 

Andrew: Yeah, I agree. I think so too. 

Legal and Government Actions
Colton: So many people are concerned with, uh, reporting a dog bite incident, uh, and, uh, whether or not the dog itself would be put down. 

Andrew: A dog bite liability case is a civil case, so the only remedy your lawyer can really obtain for you in the context of a dog bite is money damages for your harms and losses. Money. 

There may be government action. Based on regulation, government action, depending on the nature and the severity of the injury. There could be other kinds of prosecution that comes out of a serious dog bite. By and large, in our experience, most dog bite cases don't result in any real consequence to the dog. Certainly not from civil litigation. If there is, it's because it's a serious injury and that's government prosecution for the public safety. 

Colton: What we typically see is maybe a fine to the dog owner and that's pretty much it, so. 
Andrew: Yeah, it's rare circumstances where the dog is put down. 
Colton: You know, it's important to get a lawyer, um, early on in terms of a potential dog bite case because a lawyer can try to take steps to ascertain, A, whether or not there's adequate insurance responding and B, try to guide you in the correct path so that you can preserve your claim, to guide you in the right direction, to seek medical attention and to assist you along the process of the case.

Have Questions? Contact Us Today!
Colton: So if you have any questions in relation to dog bite cases please don't hesitate to reach out to both Andrew and I, we're more than happy to answer any questions that you might have. Our contact details are listed in the show notes below.

​

When Americans travel to Canada, they may not expect the possibility of facing an accident or injury. However, it’s essential to understand how cross-border legal claims work, particularly for personal injuries sustained abroad. This article explores the legal rights Americans have in Canada and how their unique healthcare system can impact their claims.

Legal Rights for Americans Injured in Canada
Both Canada and the United States operate under a common law system, meaning that individuals generally have the right to pursue a civil claim for personal injuries. However, when a resident of one country is injured in the other, it’s important to remember that local laws govern their rights and remedies.

In Canada, just as in the United States, individuals can file claims against at-fault parties when negligence causes harm. At our law firm, we’ve helped many American residents who were injured while visiting Canada, especially in Ontario, to secure fair compensation for their injuries.

Ontario's System for Addressing Negligence
Ontario has a robust legal system that acknowledges the rights of individuals harmed due to someone else’s negligence. For Americans injured in Ontario – whether in a car accident, a slip and fall incident, or a store-related injury – there are avenues to seek compensation. Although Canadian laws may differ in terms of what types of damages are recoverable, Americans can still advance claims for negligence in Ontario.

Advantages of the U.S. Healthcare System in Cross-Border Claims
Interestingly, Americans who sustain injuries in Canada may find a unique advantage in their home country’s healthcare system. The U.S. healthcare system often allows for faster access to diagnostic imaging, specialists, and surgical procedures. Canadian insurers, recognizing this, may be more inclined to seek early resolutions with American claimants, likely due to the efficiency and immediacy of healthcare in the U.S.

In the United States, injured individuals can often access imaging quickly, see specialists without lengthy waits, and undergo surgeries or treatments in a timely manner. This accelerated healthcare process not only benefits the injured party but also strengthens the legal process by enabling quicker, clearer insights into the extent of injuries and necessary treatments. This can result in a smoother, more efficient claims process when seeking compensation from Canadian insurance providers.

Challenges with Universal Healthcare in Canada
Canada’s universal healthcare system is accessible and affordable for all residents, yet it can present challenges in terms of speed. While high-quality care is available, wait times for non-urgent procedures, imaging, and specialist visits can be significantly longer than in the U.S. This slower pace may delay access to important medical information, which can impact how quickly and effectively an injury claim can be advanced.

For Canadian residents injured within Canada, the wait for an MRI, specialist opinion, or certain treatments can extend for months, and even years in remote areas. This delay can make it challenging to demonstrate the full extent of injuries in a timely manner. In contrast, Americans injured in Canada often benefit from their ability to return to the U.S. for faster healthcare services, allowing legal teams to quickly gather the medical documentation needed to advance their claims.

Get Expert Help for Your Cross-Border Injury Claim
If you’re an American injured while visiting Canada, it’s important to seek legal advice to understand your rights and options. At Iacobelli Law Firm, we have extensive experience helping Americans pursue claims in Ontario, providing guidance and support throughout the process.

Feel free to reach out to us through our website or call our toll-free number to schedule a free consultation. We’re here to help you understand your rights, explore your options, and work towards securing the compensation you deserve.

In 1978, the Supreme Court of Canada introduced a cap on general damages (pain and suffering) through a series of landmark cases known as the “trilogy”. This cap, initially set at $100,000 for non-pecuniary losses such as pain and suffering, has been adjusted over time for inflation and currently stands at approximately $400,000. The suggested purpose of the cap was to promote fairness and consistency in personal injury compensation, ensuring that awards for pain and suffering did not become excessive or unpredictable.  In my respectful view, the rationale for the cap is flawed and it results in an extremely unbalanced compensation for injury victims.  The reality is that the most severely injured people in Canada are the most prejudiced by the cap on pain and suffering, while people with modest injuries are fully compensated for their pain and suffering.    The prejudicial outcome for seriously injured Canadians greatly outweighs any suggested benefit of a cap on pain and suffering remedies.  

In my view, the cap on general damages is inconsistent with the fundamental principles of civil justice.  The cap unfairly penalizes the most severely injured Canadians by preventing full compensation for their non-economic losses while allowing those with minor injuries to be fully compensated. The article will explore the origins of the cap, its rationale, and how it disproportionately harms the most vulnerable injury victims. It will also examine how the cap undermines the basic principle of civil justice by devaluing non-economic losses and preventing courts from awarding fair and adequate compensation to the most severely injured individuals.

The Origins of the Cap on General Damages - Pain and Suffering 
The cap on general damages was established in 1978 by the Supreme Court of Canada in a trio of cases: Andrews v. Grand & Toy Alberta Ltd., Thornton v. Prince George School Board, and Arnold v. Teno. These cases involved victims who had sustained catastrophic injuries, such as quadriplegia and brain damage, requiring lifelong care. In each case, the Court was tasked with determining the appropriate level of compensation for non-pecuniary losses, which include pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life.

The Supreme Court recognized that while economic losses—such as lost income and future care costs—could be calculated with some precision, non-pecuniary damages were more difficult to quantify. The Court expressed concern that awards for pain and suffering should not become excessive, as this could lead to unpredictability in the justice system and increased insurance premiums. To address these concerns, the Court imposed a cap on general damages, initially set at $100,000, to act as a ceiling for non-economic compensation. This cap was meant to promote fairness and consistency, ensuring that non-pecuniary damages remained proportionate across different cases.

The Disproportionate Impact on the Most Severely Injured
While the cap may have been intended to prevent excessive awards, it is a poor solution.  It is for local judges and juries to decide the verdict in the context of the facts of the case.  There are other remedies to challenge or overturn court decisions that are not supported by the law or facts of the case.  A cap is a poor solution.  In Canada, it has resulted in a disproportionate harm to the most severely injured individuals. For minor or moderate injuries, the cap does not pose any barrier to fair compensation, as the general damages awarded for pain and suffering often fall within the capped amount. In these cases, plaintiffs may feel that their compensation adequately reflects their pain and suffering.  On the other hand, for individuals with catastrophic injuries—such as quadriplegia, severe brain injuries, or total loss of mobility—the cap on general damages for pain and suffering creates a significant shortfall. These individuals, whose entire lives are irrevocably altered, are limited to the same capped amount as those with far less severe injuries. As a result, the most severely injured Canadians are effectively under-compensated for the profound physical, emotional, and psychological toll that their injuries impose on them and their families.

This disparity highlights a fundamental flaw in the cap system: it treats all injuries as though they are comparable, even when the harm suffered varies dramatically. For the least injured, the cap is rarely an issue, as their compensation for pain and suffering typically falls well within the capped limit. But for those who suffer catastrophic injuries, the cap prevents them from receiving full and fair compensation. The one-size-fits-all approach flattens the scale of justice, failing to reflect the vastly different impacts that severe injuries can have on individuals’ lives.

Inconsistent with the Principles of Civil Justice
One of the core principles of civil justice is that a victim should be fully compensated for the harm they have suffered, whether that harm is economic or non-economic. This principle is rooted in fairness and accountability, ensuring that those responsible for causing injury are held to account and that victims are made whole to the extent that is possible through financial compensation. Yet, the cap on general damages for pain and suffering disrupts this principle by arbitrarily limiting compensation for non-economic losses.

Civil remedies are designed to restore the injured party to their pre-injury state. When an individual sustains a serious injury, they suffer not only economic losses, such as lost wages and medical bills, but also non-economic losses, such as pain, suffering, and the loss of their quality of life. In the civil justice system, monetary compensation is the only remedy available to address these non-economic losses. Courts cannot reverse time or restore a victim’s health, but they can award financial compensation to acknowledge the harm and provide some measure of relief.

The imposition of a cap that limits general damages restricts the courts’ ability to fully compensate individuals for their non-economic losses. For victims of catastrophic injury, the emotional and psychological suffering they endure is often profound. Their quality of life is permanently diminished, and the pain they experience can be lifelong. The cap, by artificially limiting the amount that can be awarded for these losses, forces courts to award compensation that does not fully reflect the extent of the harm suffered.

The Devaluation of Non-Economic Losses
A troubling aspect of the cap on general damages is the implicit devaluation of non-economic losses compared to economic losses. Economic losses, such as lost income and future care costs, are not subject to the same rigid limits as non-economic losses. This creates the impression that economic harm is more significant or more deserving of compensation than the pain and suffering experienced by the injured party.

For many injury victims, particularly those with life-altering injuries, non-economic losses can be the most devastating. The loss of mobility, independence, and the ability to enjoy life can have a more profound impact on a person’s well-being than the loss of income or the cost of medical care.  Yet, the cap treats these non-economic losses as secondary, limiting compensation for the very aspects of the injury that have the most personal and lasting effect on the victim.  

The distinction between economic and non-economic damages reflects a flawed understanding of what it means to suffer harm. Economic damages can be calculated with some precision, but non-economic damages often represent the deepest, most personal losses—those that fundamentally alter how an individual experiences the world. By capping general damages, the legal system is effectively saying that these losses are less important or less deserving of compensation than financial losses, a notion that is both outdated and unjust.

Prioritizing Insurance Costs Over Catastrophic Injury Victims
One of the key rationales behind the cap on general damages, particularly in cases of pain and suffering, is the concern over the rising cost of insurance. Proponents of the cap argue that limiting non-economic damages helps keep insurance premiums manageable for individuals, businesses, and public institutions. However, this perspective effectively prioritizes the financial interests of insurers over the real, tangible suffering experienced by those with catastrophic injuries. By capping damages for pain and suffering, the legal system is placing a higher value on protecting the insurance industry from potential costs than on compensating individuals whose lives have been irrevocably damaged. This approach fails to account for the profound, life-altering losses these victims endure—losses that cannot be fully quantified in economic terms. While maintaining reasonable insurance premiums is important, it should not come at the expense of fairly compensating the most severely injured individuals, whose suffering extends far beyond the economic impact.

A Call for Reform
The cap on general damages in Canada needs to be revisited and reformed. While the cap may serve a purpose in limiting excessive awards in cases of minor injury, its rigid application to cases of catastrophic injury creates significant injustice for the most severely injured. These individuals, whose lives are permanently and profoundly affected, deserve compensation that fully reflects the depth of their suffering.

Reforming the cap would involve recognizing the profound impact that non-economic losses have on injury victims, particularly those with catastrophic injuries. The civil justice system should allow for greater flexibility in awarding non-pecuniary damages, ensuring that those who suffer the most are not penalized by an arbitrary limit on their compensation. A more nuanced approach, one that takes into account the severity of the injury and the extent of the harm, would restore balance and fairness to the system.

Andrew Iacobelli is an experienced personal injury lawyer who established Iacobelli Law Firm with offices located in Ontario, Canada and Florida, U.S.A. Andrew restricts his practice to the representation of personal injury victims in claims involving serious injuries, Catastrophic Injuries, and wrongful death in Canada and the United States.  Andrew is a lifetime member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and  the author of "Are You a Canadian Injured in the United States? Claim the Damages and Insurance Coverage the Right Way". Andrew also hosts a popular podcast and YouTube channel on the subject of personal injury law and the rights of injury victims. ​

In the realm of insurance claims, the insured's cooperation is a fundamental aspect. But what happens when the insured doesn't cooperate fully? Can an insurer deny coverage? The answer depends on whether the non-cooperation amounts to "non-compliance" or "imperfect compliance."

Non-Compliance vs. Imperfect Compliance
Non-compliance occurs when the insured's non-cooperation is substantial, prejudicing the insurer's ability to defend a claim. This can lead to a denial of coverage. Imperfect compliance, on the other hand, refers to less severe instances of non-cooperation that do not significantly harm the insurer's position.

The Impact of Prejudice to the Insurer
Prejudice to the insurer is a key factor in determining whether non-cooperation constitutes non-compliance. If the insurer's rights are prejudiced due to the insured's failure to cooperate, the insurer may not be obligated to provide coverage.

Case Law Examples
Several court cases illustrate these principles:

• Kozel v. The Personal Insurance Company: The court considered whether an insurer was required to defend and indemnify an insured who had breached her policy by driving with an expired license. The court determined that the breach constituted imperfect compliance and granted relief from forfeiture.
• Ruddell v. Gore Mutual Insurance Company: This case emphasized the qualitative analysis of the insured's conduct to determine substantial non-cooperation.
• Satter v. Pafco Insurance Co.: The court highlighted the prejudice caused to the insurer by the insured's refusal to cooperate.

Relief from Forfeiture
Relief from forfeiture is a remedy available for imperfect compliance but not for non-compliance. To obtain relief, the insured must demonstrate reasonableness, a lack of gravity in the breach, and a disparity between the forfeited property's value and the damage caused.

Conclusion
The distinction between non-compliance and imperfect compliance is crucial in determining an insurer's obligation to provide coverage when the insured fails to cooperate fully. If you're facing a situation involving non-cooperation, it's essential to understand your rights and seek legal advice to protect your interests.

Andrew Iacobelli is an experienced personal injury lawyer who established Iacobelli Law Firm with offices located in Ontario, Canada and Florida, U.S.A. Andrew restricts his practice to the representation of personal injury victims in claims involving serious injuries and wrongful death in Canada and the United States.  Andrew is the author of "Are You a Canadian Injured in the United States? Claim the Damages and Insurance Coverage the Right Way". ​

If you're a Canadian who has been injured in a car accident in the USA, you may be wondering what your options are for compensation. If the at-fault driver had insufficient insurance to cover your damages, such as medical bills, lost income and pain and suffering, you might be able to make a claim under your own insurance policy's underinsured motorist coverage (UM/UIM). However, it's crucial to understand that there are strict deadlines for filing such claims in Ontario.

Understanding the Statute of Limitations for Underinsured Motorist Claims
In Ontario, every personal injury claim, including those for underinsured motorist coverage, is governed by a statute of limitations. This sets the deadline by which you must initiate legal proceedings. Historically, determining the exact deadline for UM/UIM claims has been challenging.

While the general limitation period for personal injury claims in Ontario is two years from the date of the accident, auto insurance policies often have shorter deadlines and additional notice requirements. This can create confusion for those seeking compensation.

The Case Law:
A ClarificationThe Ontario Court of Appeal provided much-needed clarity in the case of Schmitz v. Lombard General Insurance Company of Canada, 2014 ONCA 88. The court affirmed that the limitation period for an underinsured motorist claim doesn't necessarily begin on the accident date.

Instead, these claims are considered a breach of contract. Therefore, the clock starts ticking the day after you make a formal demand for indemnity to your insurance company. This ruling often gives accident victims more time to assess the available insurance coverage before pursuing a claim against their own insurer.  It's important to be aware, however, that you may start clock running when a demand is made for indemnity from the UIM Insurance policy.  

Although there is an opportunity to extend the statute of limitations on an underinsured motorist Claim, it is still prudent to advance these claims in court within 2 years from the date of the accident to avoid any defense on the statute of limitations argument.  

Venue and Forum - Where Do You File Your Underinsured Motorist Claim for an Accident in the United States:
UIM claims are essentially disputes between you and your own insurance company regarding the terms of your contract. Since your insurance policy was likely issued in Ontario and your insurer is based in Ontario, the appropriate venue for the claim is an Ontario court.   In our extensive experience with cross-border accident cases, we have seen many cases where US courts have dismissed actions against the UIM carriers that are commenced in the US state court. 

Does the Ontario UIM Carrier Have a Right of Subrogation?
​Yes.  Ontario auto insurance policies have a right of subrogation if you pursue an Underinsured Motorist Claim against them.  This means, they will have your right to advance a claim against the at-fault party in the United States to be reimbursed for any money damages that pay to you in regard to an injury or losses caused by a third party that was inadequately insured.  Because of this, it is important to communicate with an experienced cross-border accident lawyer before signing any releases in the United States. 

It is also important to note that, although the UIM carrier has the right to subrogation, they do not have an indefinite ability to insist that their insured withhold a release to the at-fault party in connection with a settlement of the US policy limits.  Some Canadian insurers will state that their insured cannot accept limits in the United States and sign a release, as this is "prejudicial" to the UIM carrier and is a breach of the duty to cooperate.  This position, however, is not tenable at law. 

In the case of Somersall v. Friedman, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 109, 2002 SCC 59,  the Supreme Court of Canada pronounced, inter alia, that:

The only obligation that is clearly placed upon the insured in either of these clauses is the requirement that the insured “cooperate with the Insurer, except in a pecuniary way”, in the pursuit of the action. I am again not persuaded that this can be regarded as requiring the insured to maintain the action’s viability. In the first place, the insured is not required to cooperate until a payment has been made. Since, in this case, no payment has yet been made, the insured is not bound by this provision at all.

We often have to educate insurers and their defense counsel on the law in Canada as established by the Supreme Court.  

How We Help Canadians Injured in the United States:
Andrew Iacobelli regularly assists individuals and their attorneys with cross-border accident cases involving Canadians injured in the United States, and American citizens and residents injured in Canada.  Andrew is admitted to practice law in Ontario, Michigan, Florida and Texas and he is the author of of "Are You a Canadian Injured in the United States? Claim the Damages and Insurance Coverage the Right Way".   Andrew has offices in both Ontario and Florida.  If you are a Canadian injured in the United States, or an attorney representing a Canadian client in the United States, we can help.  Andrew regularly co-counsel's with attorneys throughout the United States to coordinate claims available to Canadians in Canada.  To learn more, call us anytime at 866-234-6093. 


Disclaimer: This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It's crucial to consult with a qualified legal professional regarding your specific situation.

How does an insurance company defend your allegations, your claim that you're injured, that you're in pain, that you need ongoing health care, that you are losing income, maybe, and it's all because of this accident.

Common Misunderstandings About Insurance Claims
Sometimes there's a misunderstanding where the client believes that the insurance company is paying them because they've been through some traumatic event that resulted in injuries and therefore they should be entitled to pain and suffering, money for income loss and healthcare expenses and things of that nature, maybe assistance around their home. 

Insurance Company Strategies to Deny Claims
I have had clients say, it's really obvious that I'm hurt. I'm the victim. I was doing nothing wrong. It's clearly their fault. They rear ended me. Or worse, I was a pedestrian and I got hit and I was in the right. I was in the crosswalk. I was doing everything appropriately.

And you're correct. You are correct insofar as it wasn't your fault and you were hurt. And you are hurt. But, it's not enough for the insurance company. 

They intentionally delay and deny claims with the expectation that your case will get weaker and weaker and it will be harder for you to tell your story successfully in front of a judge or a jury by the time you get to court. 

The Importance of Continuous Treatment
They're hoping by that time, it's a distant memory. You're much better now. You're not seeing doctors. It's not having a major impact on your life, at least in a visible way to a jury. And so it's incumbent upon you as the injured party, as long as your case is ongoing, but more importantly, as long as you're having symptoms to continue to treat those symptoms, continue to try to get better.

How Insurance Companies Build Their Defense
There's another important reason to follow the advice of your treatment team and create risk for the insurance company so that they're going to pay you more for your case without going to trial against you. 
Okay now, how does an insurance company defend your allegations, your claim that you're injured? How do they defeat that? Well, a couple of ways. 

One, they ask questions, take depositions, they pull calls, they test the witnesses to see how strong the case is. But the other way is in the affirmative. The insurance will come out with its own theory. So they present a different set of an alternative theory to the jury or the judge.

The Role of Doctors in Insurance Claims
Let's send you to our Doctor. Let's see what our doctor has to say about your injuries, if they're as significant as you say. The insurance companies have extremely deep pockets and resources, so they can typically locate very well credentialed, well spoken physicians to assess you. And these physicians, more often than not, no matter what your injuries are, will downplay the severity of those injuries. Because they're doing work regularly on behalf of insurance companies and they're being paid handsomely to give opinions, to support insurance companies, to reduce the risk to the insurance companies so that they can pay you less for your case. 

There's no mystery, they're paying thousands upon thousands of dollars to another doctor for only one reason. So that they can overall save money on claims. 

The Battle of Medical Opinions in Injury Claims
Let's look at that for a minute. So they get a doctor who says you're not as hurt as you say you are. And they expect to present that to a judge or a jury. 

On your end, What do you have? Well, if you haven't treated much in the last year, you may have an expert that your lawyer's hired, just like the insurance company. And so now the jury is faced with two alternative theories, both by doctors that really don't know you, that have seen lots of people simply in the context of litigation. And just as much as your lawyer wants to argue, well, that doctor's really not as reliable because he was hired by the insurance company. Well, the alternative. is going to be argued by the defense. Why should you believe the plaintiff's doctor? Their lawyer hired that doctor to give an opinion here in court. 

The real differentiation comes from the treatment team. They have nothing to do with the case. These are healthcare people that are involved with you for one reason, to try to get you better. Most of the time, they've seen you on multiple occasions over an extended period of time. They recognize you when they see you. They know your name. You're not just a file to them. You're a patient. That's another distinguishing factor that helps you overcome the insurance company's alternative story or alternative theory about your case.

The Litigation Process Explained
Another way I often explain this, litigation is like having a ticket to ride a train. 

So your ticket allows you to board the train, and the train is the civil justice system. It's what allows private individuals to bring or advance a claim if they sustained a harm or loss because of somebody else's negligence.

And now this train is headed to a final destination, which is the courthouse, more specifically the trial. Okay, that's where it ends. That's the very last stop. But along the way, it stops for discovery, documents that are exchanged. It stops for depositions, which are oral examinations where the lawyers get to ask questions of the other party. It might stop for a mediation or other settlement conference. There's motions, which are arguments in court between the parties. 

Settlement Offers and Decision Making
There are all these different stops before you get to trial. And along the way, the insurance company will be walking up and down the train, and they'll come to you, and they'll say, Why don't you get off at this stop? And we're going to buy your ticket. Can't get back on the train. You're not going to go to the final stop. And they'll offer you some money. And with the advice of your lawyer, you'll decide at that point if it's enough. And if it is, you'll get off the litigation train and you'll never see that final stop of trial.

Strengthening Your Case with Support
But very often you'll say no, because your lawyer will tell you, no, we have momentum. We have support. They are supporting doctors, and treatment providers, and family members, and co workers, and friends, and all these people that will get on the train with us. We're going to pick them up at this stop. You get some updated clinical notes and records. And so that doctor's now boarded the train with you and is seated next to you. 

And invariably the insurance company who's also riding the train sees that. And so they come around again. And this time, instead of offering you $500 for your ticket. They said we'll give you $750 for your ticket if you get off the train now.

They're paying you to get you off the train. And they'll pay you more, typically, but closer you get to the last stop. Provided, this is the big key, your case appears to be getting stronger and the risk increases to the insurance company. And so by that healthcare, family members, friends, all these people board the train with you and will come with you to trial and be there for you to help tell your story.

Why the Insurance Company Isn’t Offering More
So the reason I'm sharing this is because it comes up very often with clients that are trying to understand why is it the insurance company offering me more money? I am hurt and I've been hurt ever since. And I told them I was hurt at my deposition and I'll tell them again how hurt I am and I told them about the challenges I have every day and the pain I go to bed with and the pain I wake up with and the difficulty sleeping and all that's true and fair but the insurance company looks at that case and says well that's going to be a more difficult case to prove in front of a jury than the person that has the robust treatment team that dovetails with that story and really helps really helps to explain that story. 

Have Questions? Contact Us Today for a  Free Consultation
Ask questions to your lawyer, get advice. Find out what you could do to help maximize the value of your case. If you have any questions, we're always here for you. You can call us or you can complete our contact form and we're happy to answer your questions. I hope you found this video informative.

Andrew Iacobelli is an experienced personal injury lawyer who established Iacobelli Law Firm with offices located in Ontario, Canada and Florida, U.S.A. Andrew restricts his practice to the representation of personal injury victims in claims involving serious injuries, Catastrophic Injuries, and wrongful death in Canada and the United States.  Andrew is a lifetime member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and  the author of "Are You a Canadian Injured in the United States? Claim the Damages and Insurance Coverage the Right Way". Andrew also hosts a popular podcast and YouTube channel on the subject of personal injury law and the rights of injury victims. ​

In Ontario, municipalities are responsible for maintaining sidewalks to ensure they are safe for public use. This responsibility includes inspecting sidewalks for potential hazards, such as cracks or uneven surfaces, which could cause pedestrians to trip and fall. The rules governing how municipalities should maintain sidewalks are set out in Ontario's Minimum Maintenance Standards (MMS). One specific area of concern under these standards is "surface discontinuities"—vertical differences in the sidewalk that create a step-like formation.

What is a Surface Discontinuity?
A surface discontinuity occurs when there is a vertical step or height difference in the sidewalk surface. This could be due to a crack, a joint in the pavement, or even a difference in height between the sidewalk and a utility cover like a manhole. According to the Minimum Maintenance Standards, a surface discontinuity of 2 centimeters or more is significant enough to require action from the municipality.

What Happens if Someone Trips and Falls?
If someone trips and falls on a sidewalk due to a surface discontinuity that is 2 centimeters or more and the municipality has not addressed the issue within the 14-day period after being informed, the municipality could be held liable for the injury. However, if the discontinuity is less than 2 centimeters, or if the municipality has followed the inspection schedule and addressed issues within the required timeframe, it may be more challenging to hold them responsible.

To put it in simple terms: Imagine you’re walking down the sidewalk and suddenly trip over a bump where one section of the sidewalk is higher than the other. If that bump is 2 centimeters or more and the city already knew about it (or should have known from their inspections) but didn’t fix it within 14 days, the city might have to pay for your injuries. However, if the bump is less than 2 centimeters, or if they hadn’t found it yet in their routine checks, it’s less likely you could successfully claim that the city is responsible.

How We Can Assist
Navigating the complexities of municipal liability, particularly when it comes to sidewalk injuries, can be challenging. At Iacobelli Law Firm, we have extensive experience in handling personal injury claims, including those related to municipal negligence. If you or a loved one has been injured due to a sidewalk defect, we are here to help you understand your rights and the legal options available to you.


To learn more aobut how we can help following a trip and fall injury, schedule a free consultation. We are Ontario-Wide and can assist with claims throughout the province. 

Andrew Iacobelli is an experienced personal injury lawyer who established Iacobelli Law Firm with offices located in Ontario, Canada and Florida, U.S.A. Andrew restricts his practice to the representation of personal injury victims in claims involving serious injuries, Catastrophic Injuries, and wrongful death in Canada and the United States.  Andrew is a lifetime member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and  the author of "Are You a Canadian Injured in the United States? Claim the Damages and Insurance Coverage the Right Way". Andrew also hosts a popular podcast and YouTube channel on the subject of personal injury law and the rights of injury victims.

Experiencing a personal injury can be life-altering and challenging. Understanding the process of filing a personal injury lawsuit in Ontario is crucial for those seeking compensation for their injuries. Both victims and their families need to be aware of the steps involved to make informed decisions.

In this blog post, we outline the general process for pursuing a personal injury lawsuit in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Each case is unique, and additional steps or processes may be necessary depending on the specifics of the situation.

Step 1 - Seek Medical Attention
The first and most critical step after an injury is to seek medical attention. Not only is this vital for your health and well-being, but medical records also serve as crucial evidence in a personal injury lawsuit. Ensure all injuries are documented by healthcare professionals.

Step 2 - Consult a Personal Injury Lawyer
After addressing immediate medical needs, it’s essential to consult with a personal injury lawyer. A lawyer can provide guidance on the viability of your claim and help you understand your rights and potential compensation. They will also assist in gathering evidence and documentation to support your case.

Step 3 - Investigation and Evidence Gathering
Your lawyer will conduct a thorough investigation of the incident, collecting evidence such as medical records, accident reports, witness statements, and any other relevant documentation. This step is crucial for building a strong case.

Step 4 - Filing a Statement of Claim
To initiate the lawsuit, your lawyer will file a Statement of Claim with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. This document outlines the details of your injury, how it occurred, and the compensation you are seeking. The defendant will be served with this statement, officially notifying them of the lawsuit.

Step 5 - The Defence’s Response
After receiving the Statement of Claim, the defendant is required to file a Statement of Defence. This document will outline their response to your claims and any defences they intend to raise. If new issues are introduced in the defence, your lawyer may file a Reply within ten days.

Step 6 - Discovery Process
During the discovery process, both parties exchange relevant documents and information. This step often includes oral examinations, where each party’s lawyer questions the other party under oath. Discovery helps both sides understand the evidence and arguments that will be presented at trial.

Step 7 - Mandatory Mediation
Mediation is a critical step in personal injury lawsuits, especially in regions like Toronto, Ottawa, and Essex County, where it is mandatory. During mediation, an independent mediator helps both parties try to reach a settlement. The mediator does not make decisions but facilitates discussions. Many personal injury cases are resolved at this stage.

Step 8 - Pre-Trial Conference
If mediation does not result in a settlement, a pre-trial conference is scheduled. During this conference, both parties meet with a judge to discuss the case. The judge will review the evidence, offer opinions on the strengths and weaknesses of each side’s case, and encourage settlement. If no settlement is reached, the judge will set a trial date.

Step 9 - Trial
At trial, both parties present their evidence and arguments before a judge (and sometimes a jury). Witnesses may be called to testify, and experts might provide opinions on various aspects of the case. After considering all the evidence, the judge (or jury) will make a decision and determine the amount of compensation, if any, to be awarded.

Step 10 - Post-Trial Motions and Appeals
If either party is dissatisfied with the trial outcome, they may file post-trial motions or appeal the decision to a higher court. This process can be complex and time-consuming, requiring the expertise of an experienced lawyer.

Key Takeaways
Personal injury lawsuits can be intricate and emotionally taxing. It’s essential to have knowledgeable legal representation to navigate the process and advocate for your rights. While this blog provides an overview of the steps involved, each case is unique, and additional complexities may arise. The Iacobelli Law Firm is dedicated to assisting you through every step of your personal injury lawsuit.

For more information or to schedule a consultation, contact us at Iacobelli Law Firm.  We are Ontario-Wide and take on cases throughout the province.  

Andrew Iacobelli is an experienced personal injury lawyer who established Iacobelli Law Firm with offices located in Ontario, Canada and Florida, U.S.A. Andrew restricts his practice to the representation of personal injury victims in claims involving serious injuries, Catastrophic Injuries, and wrongful death in Canada and the United States.  Andrew is a lifetime member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, and  the author of "Are You a Canadian Injured in the United States? Claim the Damages and Insurance Coverage the Right Way". Andrew also hosts a popular podcast and YouTube channel on the subject of personal injury law and the rights of injury victims. ​