FOLLOW US HERE:

  • https://ptlawyers.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Facebook_white.svg
  • https://ptlawyers.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Twitter_white.svg
  • https://ptlawyers.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Instagram_white.svg
416.491.0111

Decisions

At Pollack Tsimerman, we’re not just lawyers, we’re litigators. We have some of the leading decisions in the areas of personal injury and insurance defence. So, if your case needs to go to court, you have the right lawyers in your corner

Browse

Decisions

Filtering by: Michelle Farb

Sun v. Ferreira, 2021 ONSC 811
Successfully defended against a motion for leave to appeal a Summary Judgment decision based on the limitation period.
Sun v. Ferreira, 2020 ONSC 4316
Successfully defended against a motion for Summary Judgment to have a personal injury claim dismissed based on the limitation period.
Taylor v. Durkee, 2020 ONSC 737
Successfully defended against an appeal to overturn a decision that the Plaintiff did not meet the statutory threshold required to be awarded damages for pain and suffering.
Paksa v. Ontario Gymnastics, 2019 ONSC 7019
Argued a motion for Summary Judgment based on a signed waiver of liability in a gymnastics facility.
Jamieson v. Kapashesit, 2019 ONSC 2831
Argued on behalf of the Defendant for costs after a successful jury verdict.
Taylor v. Durkee, 2018 ONSC 7203
Successfully argued that a Plaintiff did not meet the statutory threshold required in order to receive damages for pain and suffering.
Jamieson v. Kapashesit, 2018 ONSC 7147
Successfully defended an in-trial motion regarding the defence’s ability to argue an unavoidable accident when not specifically plead in a pleading.
Taylor v. Durkee, 2018 ONSC 489
Successfully argued that opposing counsel’s comments during a closing argument were inappropriate and required a correcting instruction from the trial judge.
Taylor v. Durkee, 2018 ONSC 7357
Defended against Plaintiff’s motion during trial to have Defence expert excluded.
Taylor v. Durkee, 2017 ONSC 7358
Argued on behalf of the Defendant the admissibility of surveillance during trial.
1203-03051 (Re), 2012 ONSBT 773
The Appellant disagrees with the Director’s February 14, 2012 decision that he is not a person with a disability, as defined in section 4 of the Ontario Disability Support Program Act,1997(ODSPA). The Director determined that the impairments were not substantial and also that there were no substantial restrictions in one or more of the activities of daily living listed in section 4(1) of the Act.
WHO WE ARE

Our people make all the difference.

Pollack Tsimerman is made up of a skilled team of lawyers who will fight to have your voice heard. Our background working for insurance companies means we know how they work, how they think, and how we can achieve the best possible results for you.