Law Cases

Front 1

White v. Turner

Back 1

Breast reduction

- defendant negligent in operating too quickly
- negligent in not flipping back skin flap

Front 2

Malinowski v. Schneider

Back 2

Chiropractor

- breached the standard of care on day 2
- failed to obtain an informed consent; inadequate consent
- failed to adequately inform the plantiff of the risks of the proposed chiropractic treatments or to inform him of the safer alternatives.

Front 3

Auton (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

Back 3

Intensive Behavioural Therapy (IBT) - challenged provincial gov failure to provide IBT for their autistic children

- IBT not a service to which indivudals had any legal right - i didn't fall w/in the guaranteed services and it was not provided by medical or other hps.
- plaintiff had no legal entitlement to IBT, gov's failure to fund it could not consitute a denial of their rights to equal protection and benefit of the law by section 15

Front 4

Muir v. Alberta

Back 4

Girl Sterilized - mental defectives

- neglience for wrongful institutionalization, confinement and sterilization
- court held the province liable

Front 5

Comeau v. Saint John Regional Hospital

Back 5

Residents, emergentologist, internal medicine specialist

Fault
- resident 10%for not reading notes or consulting with her
- specialist 25% for accepting the resident's advice and for discharging the pateint w/o consulting the emergentologist
- hospital 65% for failing to enforce its own policy - policy required internal med specialists to cnsult w/ the attending emergentologist in making diagnoses and probhibted constultants from discharging patients reffered from the emergency department.

Front 6

G. (I) v. Rusch

Back 6

- counsellor, patient, family

- counsellor didn't not own fiduary duty to family
- counsellor owned a paramount duty of care in negligence to his patient

Front 7

Jones v. Kaney

Back 7

PTSD

- psychologist was immune from liability as an expert witness.

Front 8

Turkington v. Lai

Back 8

remove a cyst on her left ovary, but removed both obvaries b/c of the conditions in which he found them

- court rejected the plainttif's claim based on a lack of informed consent

Front 9

Ahmend v. Stefaniu

Back 9

Escape and release case

- psychotic pateint, kills sister.
- did not mee the criteria for involuntary admission

- Dr. Stefaniu breached the standard of care, and was held liable in negligence.

Front 10

Molnar v. Coates

Back 10

Treatment and Supervision in the Community
- nurse refuse to schizophrenic outpatient his shot while doc was on vacation
- patient stabbed sister in the back

- doc was asolved of liability b/c he had taken reasonable steps to provide for the patient's ongoing care.
- nurse was held liable in negligence for failing to have the med schedule reasessed or otherwise address the patient's deteriorating mental state.

Front 11

Young v. Bella

Back 11

Child abuse
- missing footnote
- reported as a child abused to 3 professors, the RCMP, and at least 10 social workers.

- Bella, Rowe, the University liable in negligence
breached the standard of care for uni profess in respect of their students.

Front 12

A.(C.) v. Critchley

Back 12

Boys in foster care and boys in the youth justice system was placed in a ranch.

- Crown breached its duty for redesignating the ranch w/o ensuring that is complied w/ the requirements of the classification.
- A crown employee breached his duty by failing to conduct a foster home study of the owner and by failing to sere that the plantiff were recieving adequate education, training, recreation, and supervision.
The superintendent negligent in failing to document, investage or respond to the allegations of abuse as required by his own Department's policies.

Front 13

D.(M.) (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia

Back 13

Methadone baby, molly

Ms. Kirkenggard

- minister negligent for its bureaucratic bungling, failure to ensure effective communicaitons among staff and its decision to place Molly w/ Ms. Kirkenggard, despite her obvious unsuitability. Ministry staff's conduct fell outside of the good faith execution of their duty.
- Minister vicariously liable for Ms. Ks assaultive behaviour, b/c it had direct, day-to-day control over her conduct.
Ms. K plead guilty of criminal negligence causing bodily harm.

Front 14

R.(G.B.) v. Hollett

Back 14

school for younger offenders, employee helped students run away. Employee was fired after several months later. Plaintiff's counsellor, seduced and fondled her - run away - emotionally, physically, and sexually abused her.

- court held the school liable for failing to fire the employee once the complaints wer found to be valid. Relationship would not have developed if he was fired early.

Front 15

T. (a minor) v. Surrey County Council

Back 15

Mrs. W childcare services
- injured another baby 3 months ago - violently shaken?
- shook the infant - suffered from serious brain damage

- advisor and the local authority were held liable for their negligent misstatements concerning Mrs. W's suitability

Front 16

F.C. (Litigation guardian of) v. 511825 Ontario Inc.

Back 16

2 students w/ DD. Group home.

- school absolved for liability
- group home held liable in negligence for failing to: immediately inform the school and the CAS of all of the absences; involve the school in the meeting or plan; and maintian proper records of communication w/ the school and the Society.

- CAS was negligent for failing to inform the school when it learn of the 4 abscences and for failing to involve the school in, or inform it of, the plan to address the absences.

Front 17

Kahlon (Litigation guardian of) v. Vancouver Coastal Health Authority

Back 17

Radiologist - CT scan
The radiologist and the patient's family doc were not informed of the patient's failure to follow up.

- hosp 70% at fault for its negligent record-keeping policies and practices
- patient 30% contributorily negligent for failing to arrange for a subsequent scan after being contracted by the booking clerk.

Front 18

Bogdan

Back 18

unlicensed medical doc
- performs breast reduction surgery
- forgets to tuck in skin flap
- negligent in falling asleep during surgery
- really?

Front 19

Hill v. Johnston

Back 19

Dr. Hill - obstetrician and gynaecologist. Pharmacist.
Plantiff sued the pharmacist in defamation.
- pharmacist could raise the defence of qualified privilege. the pharmacist had a duty to prevent the misuese of prescriptions. She believed that the prescription was forged.
- court rejected the plantiff's contention that the pharmaicist had acted with malice and upheld the defence of quialified privilege.

Front 20

Newman v. Halstead

Back 20

Mrs. Halstead. Various school boards.
- 6000 pages of false, rambling and often contradictory evidence.
- 7 teachers sued for defamation

- court said Halstead's comment on the website were defamatory and that she had no defence.

Front 21

R. v. Gruenke

Back 21

First degree murder. Lay minister. Pastor. Privilege? No.

- lay minister and pastor admitted into evidence.
originated in a confidence that they would not be disclosed.
- stress instead of spiritual purposes.
- the Supreme Court concluded that the accused's statement did not meet of the Slavutych test and could not be privileged.

Front 22

Straka v. Humber River Regional Hospital

Back 22

Reference letters.

- third requirement for privlege had not been met. ??????????????????????????????????????????????

Front 23

R. v. B

Back 23

16 year old charged w/ murdering an elderly woman.

- did disclosure the OSR b/w the Canada Evidence Act
- federal law prevails over conflicting provincial law.

Front 24

R. v. O' Connor

Back 24

the record containted infomraiton that the defence requires to make full answer, the record had to be disclosed to the exten the judge deem appropriate.
- introduction of the Criminal Code amendments that provide victims of sexual assault w/ broader protection from disclosure of their counselling records in criminal proceedings. The witness in such cases are also protected.
- the effects of the decision on both acussed's right ot make full answer and defence, and on the privacy and equality rights of the complainant or witness.

Front 25

R. v. Kaija

Back 25

High school phy edu teacher - director of a community basketball program for young boys. Person B - coach.

- Kaija was charged with the provincial offence of failing to report a case of suspected child abuse under the CFSA.
- judge said: found guilty of failing to report suspected abuse. He did not have a teaching relationship w/ any of the boys in the community program. nor did it constitute any part of his educational responsibilites.

Front 26

Hockley v. Riley

Back 26

- defendant's husband repeatly sexually abused the plaintiff - a neighbourhood child that he and the defendant were babysitting.

- breach fidurary duty to the plaintiff by deliberately failing to prevent the ongoing abuse.
- court of appeal affirmed her liability

Front 27

Smith v. Jones

Back 27

Psychiatrists. Prositute. Kill Prositute.

- Court state that there must be clear risk of immient serious bodily harm or death to an identifiable person or group.
The Supreme Court upheld the pyschiatrist's request for a declaration authorizing disclosure of the privileged information.