Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) Around The World
- Chapter 3 The History of JDR in Canada
- Chapter 4 JDR's Response to the Weaknesses of Litigation
- Chapter 5 ADR v. JDR
- Chapter 6 JDR Produces Satisfactory Results: The Divorce Case
- Chapter 7 Advantages and Disadvantages of JDR
- Chapter 8 Justice and Fairness in JDR: The Motor Vehicle Accident with Pedestrian Case
- Chapter 9 Types of Judges: Skill, Temperament and Attitude in JDR Temperament in an Estate Dispute Case
- Chapter 10 Confidentiality and Privacy in JDR
- Chapter 11 Which Cases are Unsuitable for JDR?
- Chapter 12 Juggling Complexity in JDR: The Falling Rocks Case
- Chapter 13 Divergent Interests of Adversarial Lawyers and Their Clients
- Chapter 14 JDR and the Role of Precedent: The Medical Malpractice Case
- Chapter 15 The Importance of a Robust JDR Intake System
- Chapter 16 The Chief Justices and How to Triage Special (SPEC) JDR Cases
- Chapter 17 Specialized JDRs (SPECs): A Look at Three Cases and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic
- Chapter 18 How to Prepare for and What to do During a JDR: The Power Pole Case
- Chapter 19 The New World of Online Dispute Resolution (OJDR)
- Epilogue: The Future of JDR
- Bibliography
- Appendix
- Teaching Guide
- Case Studies
- Index
3 - The Motor Vehicle Accident With Pedestrian Case
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2024
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) Around The World
- Chapter 3 The History of JDR in Canada
- Chapter 4 JDR's Response to the Weaknesses of Litigation
- Chapter 5 ADR v. JDR
- Chapter 6 JDR Produces Satisfactory Results: The Divorce Case
- Chapter 7 Advantages and Disadvantages of JDR
- Chapter 8 Justice and Fairness in JDR: The Motor Vehicle Accident with Pedestrian Case
- Chapter 9 Types of Judges: Skill, Temperament and Attitude in JDR Temperament in an Estate Dispute Case
- Chapter 10 Confidentiality and Privacy in JDR
- Chapter 11 Which Cases are Unsuitable for JDR?
- Chapter 12 Juggling Complexity in JDR: The Falling Rocks Case
- Chapter 13 Divergent Interests of Adversarial Lawyers and Their Clients
- Chapter 14 JDR and the Role of Precedent: The Medical Malpractice Case
- Chapter 15 The Importance of a Robust JDR Intake System
- Chapter 16 The Chief Justices and How to Triage Special (SPEC) JDR Cases
- Chapter 17 Specialized JDRs (SPECs): A Look at Three Cases and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic
- Chapter 18 How to Prepare for and What to do During a JDR: The Power Pole Case
- Chapter 19 The New World of Online Dispute Resolution (OJDR)
- Epilogue: The Future of JDR
- Bibliography
- Appendix
- Teaching Guide
- Case Studies
- Index
Summary
The Facts
Mr. Barton, a plumber from Alpine, Saskatchewan, parked his car on the side of the TransCanada Highway and ran across the road toward a city mall. Barton had traveled to Alberta to visit friends and do some shopping. While crossing the road, Barton was hit by a 1963 GMC truck, causing severe injuries to his head, legs and back, leaving him with chronic pain and in need of long-term care. Following his discharge from the hospital in the early 2010s, Barton brought suit against the driver of the truck.
The truck was driven by Mr. Driggs, an Alberta local, who had been on the road for eight hours that day transporting hydroponic vegetables across the province. He had made this trip without incident several times before and had successfully traversed most of the nationwide TransCanada Highway throughout his career. Despite a long record of safe driving, there is no question that Driggs struck Barton that night.
Barton, the plaintiff, sued Driggs for failing to observe him or to honk the horn as a warning. He alleged that not only was Driggs fatigued and driving in a dangerous and distracted manner, but that the old truck was not properly maintained and had not been equipped with modern braking equipment. Barton would never fully recover from his injuries that had left him in the hospital for almost two months. He sought just over $1 million in damages: $200,000 for general damages, $500,000 for future loss of employment, and $350,000 for future cost of care.
Driggs, the defendant, claimed that Barton had run across the highway without warning and had caused an unavoidable collision. He also asserted that Barton had crossed the road outside of a crosswalk—which was unlawful—and without due care and attention. Driggs further claimed that although he was tired, he had exercised due caution at the time of the accident and that his slow-moving truck was properly equipped for highway driving. Lastly, Barton's sporadic work history made it difficult to estimate any loss of future income the defendant had suffered.
The parties filed timely pleadings through their lawyers. Barton hired a plaintiff-side law firm located in Alberta and filed the case in the jurisdiction where his injuries had occurred.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Judicial Dispute ResolutionNew Roles for Judges in Ensuring Justice, pp. 213 - 222Publisher: Anthem PressPrint publication year: 2023