Injury Claim Fees

We charge zero fees until we settle your claim. If we don’t succeed, you don’t pay.

Learn More.

Injured? Get a free claim estimate

Get a free, no obligation consultation. Our office will contact you within a few hours.

Get Started

Mussio Goodman Wins Again in the British Columbia Court of Appeal

Posted on by Mussio Goodman

Mussio Goodman is proud to announce a successful appeal by lawyers Karol Suprynowicz and Brian Alcaide of a ruling with respect to our client’s entitlement to her stepmother’s estate.

The exact limits of the Court’s curative power under s. 58 of the WESA, in allowing records, documents or writings that contain a Deceased’s fixed and final intention to have testamentary effect, despite falling short of WESA’s formalities under s. 37, have been stretched and put to the test since becoming law on March 31, 2014.

The facts of Paige v. Noel, 2025 BCCA 358 are striking because of how the chambers judge in Kissel Estate (Re), 2025 BCSC 260 was willing to stretch the application of this curative provision to text messages exchanged between the Deceased and her appointed executor.

Text messages have traditionally been viewed as a medium for casual communication between individuals, which prior to 2014 ran contrary to the rigid methods of execution required to ensure the validity of a will.

The chambers judge initially found that this informal method of communication was enough for the curative provisions of WESA to kick in and disinherit our client, the Deceased’s stepdaughter, from her share of 50% of the residue of the Estate.

The chambers judge held that the words “Jennifer is out” communicated by the Deceased to her executor by text message, along with extrinsic evidence of her limited engagement with legal professionals and a falling out between her and her stepdaughter, were enough to represent her fixed and final intention to disinherit our client.

Importantly, the Deceased explicitly communicated to her executor via email that “the current will that you have will stand until I get a new one”.

While the chambers judge was focused on the Deceased’s intended disinheritance, she failed to take into account the Deceased’s awareness and respect for the formal process of executing a new will.  In other words, although she expressed an intention to leave her stepdaughter out of her new will at one point, she clearly expressed her desire for her will to stand until a new one was executed.

A key consideration applied by the Court of Appeal was the “further departure” principle: “the further a document departs from formal requirements, the harder it is for a court to find it represents a Deceased’s testamentary intention” – Estate of Young, 2015 BCSC 182.

The Court of Appeal’s characterization of text messages and how they should be treated in the context of fixed and final intention was aptly summarized in para. 43 of the judgment:

“Here, had the deceased’s communications with Michelle on October 6 and 15, 2022 taken place by telephone or in person, no application under s. 58 would be possible. The fact that these communications were recorded in an electronic record does not transform a casual conversation into a legally operative testamentary record unless the content of that conversation demonstrates a fixed and final intention to effect a testamentary disposition.”

The Court of Appeal held that although the chambers correctly identified the principles relevant in making a s. 58 determination, it was her application of those principles that revealed a fundamental misconception of the meaning of “fixed and final intention” in the context of the Court’s curative powers.

The Court of Appeal discusses how the chambers judge appears to have considered a fixed and final intention to be equivalent to an unwavering stated intention rather than an intention that the document represents the testamentary intention of the Deceased at the material time.

The Respondent argued unsuccessfully that s. 58 does not require an intention that the document itself be testamentary. At para. 48 the Court of Appeal applied the modern approach of statutory interpretation to the words of s. 58(2) and determined that the document itself needs to reflect the Deceased’s fixed and final testamentary intention. Otherwise, there would be no basis on which the document could be admitted into probate.

The Court held that the Deceased’s intention could not be considered fixed and final because it was clear that she intended to effect any alteration by making a new will, and until she did so, the 2014 will was to remain operative.

Ultimately, the Court of Appeal unanimously ruled that the chambers judge made a palpable and overriding error by failing to conclude that the Deceased intended the old will to stand until a new will was carried out, which in turn ensured our client’s entitlement to her 50% share of the estate as expressed in the old will.

Jury Awards Our Client $788,000 After ICBC Argued She Only Deserves $30,000

Posted on by Mussio Goodman

Mussio Goodman is proud to announce another successful jury trial. After 15 days in court, our client was awarded $788,000 for injuries she suffered in a motor-vehicle collision that occurred nearly 10 years ago.

Before the Accident, our client was a dedicated mother and civil servant. As a single mother of two, she pursued an education and began a successful career for the federal government. Over the course of a decade, she advanced from the position of mail clerk to a counselling role, in which she gave lessons in trauma and cognitive behavioral therapy to prison inmates.

By the time of the Accident, she was well respected by both her colleagues and the prison inmates alike. She simultaneously managed her family life and career with ease. She was devoted to giving back to society, both by fostering children and by trying to better the lives of the inmates she counselled.

Her life changed when a white cargo van crossed into her lane of traffic and struck her vehicle head-on. She suffered significant physical and psychological injuries, including PTSD. Although she tried to return to work, the pain and trauma made it impossible to continue the career she loved.

Despite clear evidence of her ongoing disabilities, ICBC argued that she had sufficiently recovered within three months and that the loss of her career had nothing to do with her Accident injuries. They asked the jury to award only around $30,000, representing a few months of wage loss and rehabilitation treatments.

Clearly the jury disagreed with ICBC’s version of events. After hearing from family, friends, coworkers, and professionals who knew her best, they accepted our client’s account and awarded her $788,000 in damages.

Testifying in court was not easy for our client, but she was not willing to submit to ICBC’s tactics. Ultimately, her willingness to fight paid off, and this long chapter in her life finally ended.  We admire her for her strength and are proud to have represented her.

Client Awarded $500,000 at Arbitration After ICBC Argued She Only Deserved $30,000

Posted on by Mussio Goodman

Mussio Goodman secured nearly $500,000 for our client at arbitration, despite ICBC’s argument for a mere $30,000 award.

Our client, who had recently moved to Canada from the UK, was rear-ended by a distracted driver who didn’t notice traffic slowing down for an emergency vehicle. The accident was traumatic, especially because our client’s young daughter was in the car and sustained injuries of her own. Our client suffered a mild traumatic brain injury, along with neck and back injuries, and was later diagnosed with thoracic outlet syndrome—a condition causing nerve compression near the collarbone, resulting in weakness, numbness, and tingling.

Before moving to Canada, our client had worked as a dental assistant and aspired to become a dental hygienist, a career move that would have significantly increased her income and ability to provide for her young family. However, the accident, particularly the thoracic outlet syndrome, reduced fine motor skills needed to pursue a dental hygiene career as she could no longer safely treat patients. Despite this setback, our client showed resilience, retraining as a legal assistant. She secured a position at a national law firm before transferring to the Department of Justice. Though she found little fulfillment in this work, she persevered to support her family.

ICBC employed aggressive tactics during the arbitration, presenting hours of invasive surveillance footage, scrutinizing minor discrepancies between her resume and actual experience, and calling former coworkers who barely knew her to testify. Despite medical experts—including those hired by ICBC—largely agreeing on the severity and nature of her injuries, ICBC suggested during the arbitration that our client was uninjured and entirely healthy, reducing her to tears.

While the arbitrator was left with the difficult task of assessing various probabilities of our client being accepted into hygiene school and securing a position, he was unmoved by much of ICBC’s argument. The outcome speaks for itself: our client received an award over 16 times higher than what ICBC suggested in closing arguments.

Mussio Goodman obtains six figure settlement for client injured during surgery

Posted on by Mussio Goodman

Medical malpractice occurs at a vulnerable moment for most people. In this case, our client was injured during a routine hernia repair, resulting in significant injuries. The doctor negligently cut her bowel while installing a metal mesh, resulting in the bowel becoming necrotic. When our client returned to the hospital complaining she was in extreme pain and throwing up, the ER doctor did not bother to investigate with a CT scan.

Due to the injury and the delay in investigation, a large section of the bowel died and had to be removed.

Partner Thomas O’Mahony took on the claim and established that both doctors in this case fell below the standard of care when treating our client. Using the resources of Mussio Goodman, including its roster of court accepted medical experts, he obtained a six figure settlement that provided the compensation for our client’s care, and for her pain and suffering.

When injured during a surgery or by a lack of appropriate investigation, it is important to consult with legal experts who have the experience to understand the injury, the resources to litigate the claim, and the reputation to get good dollars on the table.

Jury Awards Client Over 3 Million Dollars

Posted on by Mussio Goodman

On February 1, 2025, after a two week trial and two days of jury deliberations, the jury returned a verdict in overwhelming favour of our client following a November 2019 car accident.

Our client had a long history of working full time in retail – often working 12-hour shifts five or six days a week. In 2018 our client left her retail job to find something new and meaningful. She found a position at a spa which seemed like the perfect fit – however, full time hours were not available right away. Rather than pass up the great opportunity, our client started part time while the spa owner started training her to take on a full-time management position.

Unfortunately, due to her injuries, our client was not able to return to work and realize these plans. Because she happened to be working part time when she was injured, ICBC argued that she would never have returned to full time work if the accident had not occurred. Because ICBC refused to make a reasonable settlement offer that accounted for her plans to return to full time hours, our client was forced to trial.

During trial, ICBC made a point of spending hours showing the jury our client’s social media posts – our client had not made her social media private as she had nothing to hide. ICBC argued that because she could smile on camera and sell homemade crafts at a market for a few hours a month that she was capable of returning to work.

Clearly, the jury disagreed. The jury awarded our client almost everything she claimed for and over 2 million dollars for her pain and suffering. In Canada, neither judges nor lawyers are allowed to suggest an award for pain and suffering – the court relies on the jury to reflect community standards. This is different from a trial by judge alone where the lawyers can cite similar cases and argue an appropriate dollar figure.

What the jury did not know is that in Canada there is a cap of about $450,000 for pain and suffering. After their initial verdict, the judge gave the jury a special instruction about this cap and explained to them that $450,000 would reflect catastrophic injuries like paraplegia. After late night deliberations, the jury ended up awarding $175,000 for pain and suffering.

All in all, the total award was about $1.3 million for pain and suffering, past and future wage loss, future care, and loss of housekeeping capacity.

 

Jury Awards Over $1.2 Million After ICBC Argued Our Client Deserves Almost Nothing

Posted on by Mussio Goodman

Mussio Goodman is pleased to announce our very successful 10-day jury trial where our client was ultimately awarded well over $1.2 million.

Our client was a bright young PhD student looking forward to a long and successful career in archeology. She had dreamed to become a professor at a top tier research university, and it seemed that there was nothing to stand in her way. She had graduated from both UBC and Oxford, and was just about to accept a PhD offer from a top US school when she was rear-ended by the defendant in 2019.

Due to her injuries, our client could not commence her PhD program and had all but given up hope before she finally thought she was ready to try again a couple of years later. In 2021 she started her PhD with an accommodating professor who described her as the “top 1%” of students she had ever come across. However, our client was not able to keep up with the intensely physical demands of archeology work, and quickly started falling behind. The faculty at UBC was content to let our client pace herself and extend deadlines, but it was clear she would never be a competitive candidate for a highly sought after professorship. At best, she might go on to be a part time college teacher or lab tech.

Because our client was always honest with her doctors, she reported to her GP when she was feeling some improvement. Despite the medical experts agreeing that our client had been seriously injured, ICBC focused their submissions at trial on the few records that showed improvement, and made every effort to make our client look like a liar.  ICBC argued that our client quickly improved after the accident but then somehow must have been injured later – all without any evidence. ICBC submitted that the jury should award our client a few thousand dollars to cover some physio.

The jury however, made up of eight people selected from a cross section of society, sided with the overwhelming evidence in favour of our client.

Congratulations to our client who refused to back down and fought for her day in Court. We are immensely proud of her fortitude, the jury’s keen sense of fairness, as well as the results we achieved on our client’s behalf.