Ontario- Woman runs over teen and sues

[Ken7]

I would suggest that the lawyers that took on Mr. & Mrs. Simons case must feel they have a good chance of getting a judgement, or they would never have agreed to take the case on in the first place.

If a lawyer does not feel they would succeed in a law suit, they can refuse to open a file, after a consultation with the people wanting to sue..

There is also the possibility they are looking at breaking the ice, if you know of a Lawyer by the name of Tony Merchant, the king of class action law suits in Saskatchewan. He took a chance on his first and once he succeeded he has ran many.

One never knows, this lawyer might be hoping for a successful suit and starting a new precedence in Ontario, and may realize it is slim however it may open many more cases which 33% of a million is not a bad paycheck. We occasionally call these lawyers - "Ambulance Chasers" which is very common in the USA.

[opinion2015]

Good morning Ken7;

I have tried to respond to your email but you have your privacy settings on. You can email me again, with your PM settings changed. When I respond, you can reset.

Opinion2015

[Oxl3y]

I hope someone throws a brick through her window every day with child murderer taped to it. If she wants money for emotional trauma might as well make it worth it.

[Ken7]

I hope someone throws a brick through her window every day with child murderer taped to it. If she wants money for emotional trauma might as well make it worth it.

I hope the court puts a stop to law suits such as this, the ones who should be going after compensation are the families who were victims. I have trouble with lawyers who would consider representing cases such as this, they are greedy and unprofessional in my opinion.

[Donald G]

In the highly theoretical world of our Canadian Court System ANYTHING is possible since any relationship to reality is strictly accidental. Justice is frequently only an uninvolved bystander, as is common sense.

Money is the name of the game.

[GrooveTunes]

[
...I am reminded of the case about the lady in Quebec who was sentenced to prison for stopping on a highway to allow ducks to cross the road, and caused an accident. I know that is off topic, but when I first read that story I was certain that she would not spend any time in prison, let alone be found guilty of a criminal offence- I was shocked by that outcome- and am not shocked about this story and this law suit.[/quote]

I don't know why anyone would be shocked that she went to prison. She killed a guy on a motorcycle and deserved to go to prison. Over a family of ducks.

[36Drew]

I note that the time of the accident was 1:30 am. The three boys that were hit were on bicycles, and they were three abreast on a rural road.

In tort law, the plaintiff (Mrs. Simon) needs to prove that the defendants (boys on the bicycles) were negligent, and were a direct cause of any injury, physical or emotional, she suffered before she gets any compensation. The judge or jury who hears this case will have to rely on precedent case law to determine if the boys, riding their bicycles on a rural road, in the dark- likely without any illumination on their bikes, are negligent- do any degree. Mrs. Simon will have to provide evidence from medical experts to prove she suffered significant emotional distress, and loss of income, past and future- to properly assess any claim for damages the court may find she has.

I am NOT condoning the law suit, or the sum of money being demanded by Mrs. Simon's lawyer, but she was likely threatened with a law suit for the death of the one boy, and the serious injuries suffered by the other. I suspect her insurance company is denying any liability for compensation the boys are seeking, because they do NOT feel Mrs. Simon was at fault for the collision, and thus this case is destined for a court room.

Will be interesting to see what the decision of the court will be, but anyone has the right to sue, and prove their case in a court of law- despite the optics of this law suit.

Again- I STRESS- I am NOT condoning Mrs. Simon and her legal team for initiating this law suit. I am just trying to detach myself from the emotions this article will evoke- and the reality of the situation.

You should re-read the article. It's rife with facts, which you've obviously missed, that make even the thought of your reasoning sound less than stellar. The news article clearly states that the bikes had reflectors, and at least the one boy had a high-viz safety vest on. The cyclists had no alcohol or drugs that could be found via toxicology tests. Both the driver and her husband admitted they were at a bar and had at least one drink. She was admittedly driving above the speed limit. She claims that she thought she hit a deer, and has also made the statement that the cyclists didn't use their brakes properly. How would she be able to ascertain the second statement if the first statement was truthful.

I can't find Innisfil Beach Avenue (the road named in the report), but I can find Beach Avenue in Innisfil, ON. Looking at it on Google Streetview - It's a lane, not a major roadway. I can't imagine anybody driving 90 down that stretch during the day, let alone in the wee hours of the morning.

All the power to this lady for practicing her right to bring suit. I just hope she practices the responsibility to satisfy the court order when she loses and the judge awards costs to the defendants.

[Donald G]

To 36Drew ...

You make a very sensible point based on the real life facts given. But reality and common sense is not at all what the highly theoretical courts in Canada seem to be governed by. God "herself" can only guess at what their decision will be.