Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog

Published on: January 26, 2026

In 2026 “they” are too eager to shut it down for a Snow Day

Sunday January 25th 2026 was the single snowiest day in the history of Toronto. 46 cm of snow fell at Pearson International Airport in Mississauga, ON; surpassing the previous record of 36.8cm which fell at Pearson on January 23, 1966.

The winter storm was not unexpected. It was widely reported across various news outlets that it would snow, and that it would snow a lot. The reports were accurate (for a change!). Activities, events, programs, and flights were cancelled; rightfully so. People were warned to stay off the roads. The warnings and cancellations were warranted on Sunday.

But Monday things were a different story!

The snow stopped across the GTA on Sunday evening around 930-10PM. Cities and Municipalities had at least 12 hours to do their thing to clear the roadways, sidewalks and other routes. That should be plenty of time for cities who are no strangers to winter and snow. I have no doubt that a city like Montreal could handle that sort of turnaround time. They are a serious winter city. Toronto is not.

Yet, cities and municipalities across the GTA seemingly could not handle it. Schools were cancelled quite fast, with little to no resistance, discussion or debate.

It was once a policy for school boards to stay open at all costs. Dozens of feet of snow would not stop the schools from closing. Buses, sure..They would stop running. But not schools. Get the kids in school, so that they can socialize and learn. . Even if it was just for a handful of students who came. It’s no wonder why those who were in school 20+ years ago are more resilient and socially normalized. They were forced to deal with adversity and adverse conditions. They grew and became adults. I fear our children will remain children because of things like this.

We can all understand why buses to schools should cancel if the roads are less than ideal. But having the entire school cancel when over 80% of TDSB students can walk to school or live within a 1km distance from their school; when the city had over 12 hours to plow the main sidewalks and the school boards had all of that time to plow their parking lot? I bet you that over 80 percent of your street’s driveways or parking lots for apartment complexes were cleared of snow this morning (or last night when the snow stopped). We learned from COVID that kids belong amongst other kids, and belong in school. They do not belong at home glazing over screens in the name of “remote learning“. How much remote learning can these children handle? Their eyes are growing more empty and blank by the Snow Day.

As an aside, the roads sure looked plowed to me this morning.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 23, 2026

Winter Weather Car Accidents and Car Accidents on Highway 401

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

It’s been snowy.

It’s been icy.

It’s been slushy.

It’s been mucky.

It’s been dark, cold and cloudy.

Yes my friends. It’s been a bitter cold winter.

And with bitter cold winters come lots of car accidents. Even if you have snow tires and you’re an experienced driver, and you drive slowly, accidents still happen. Because operating a 4,000+ pound machine on a sheet of ice and snow at speed isn’t supposed to be normal. Accidents will happen.

The topic of this edition of the Toronto Injury Lawyer Blog relates to winter related car accidents because a little birdy told our personal injury lawyers that this Sunday we are expecting over 30cm of snow. If even half of that amount falls on an Ontario City, it will cause some seriously dangerous driving conditions which municipalities are showing that they are having more and more difficulty handling. Cities and Municipalities seem to be less equipped to deal with winter; or is that just us thinking that. It’s a story for another blog entry.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 13, 2026

When things you post come back to bite you in personal injury cases

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

At Goldfinger Injury Lawyers, we tell our clients to be very careful about what they post on social media. Whatever gets posted, past, present or future can, or will be used against you by an insurance company at Court in order to defeat your case, or test your credibility.

When we tell people this sort of thing, they roll their eyes in disbelief. How can anything I say, or post, ever be used against me in the context of my personal injury case?

Our personal injury lawyers see this sort of thing all of the time. Here are a few examples of how social media posts can hurt a personal injury case:

Client says under oath that they can’t walk or run for a long period of time on account of their injuries sustained in the motor vehicle accident. Going for long walks and jogs has been out of the question ever since their car accident. Defence counsel then disproves this statement referencing Strava Posts of the Plaintiff’s hiking and running data. This data is publicly shared online via Facebook or on Instagram. It costs nothing for the Defendant to access these posts because they’re public. No private investigator was required. Just a quick internet search. The data shows the Plaintiff routinely going for bi-weekly runs and hikes in excess of 20km at a fast pace. The Plaintiff is dressed in running gear and is seen flexing their muscles after the workouts. #TrainHard is the hashtag in each post. Not a good look for a Plaintiff who swore under oath the exact opposite.
Plaintiff says they don’t go out, they no longer go on vacation, and that they no longer socialize with friends as much since the subject accident; they don’t like being in big crowds of people due to social anxiety developed as a result of the accident. But, social medial tells a completely difference picture. It shows the Plaintiff away on a Caribbean vacation post accident. It shows the Plaintiff smiling and socializing at a friend’s wedding. It shows the Plaintiff out at a professional sporting event attended by 40,000+ people (post accident). These images discredit the Plaintiff’s injuries, and call into question his/her veracity and credibility. Everything which the Plaintiff says will be taken with a large grain silo of salt moving forward (along with his/her past statements and allegations)
Clinical notes and records of the family doctor show that the Plaintiff is not supposed to life objects of 10 pounds or greater. Plaintiff testifies under oath that s/he cannot lift objects of 10 pounds or greater, nor can they do any heavy lifting, bending or squatting. Images of the Plaintiff circulate online of him/her participating in a rock climbing event; and a curling tournament. The average curling stone weighs between 38-44 pounds. So much for the statement that the Plaintiff cannot lift; or should not be lifting objects over 10 pounds.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 7, 2026

E-Bike Accidents and E-Bike Fatality Cases

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

Around 5 years ago, Goldfinger Injury Lawyers noticed a surge in E-bike accident calls to our law firm. E-bikes had gained popularity. More e-bikes were being sold by run of the mill bike shops and big box stores alike. More people were open and excited to use them. Any why not? They were affordable methods of convenient and environmentally friendly transportation. E-Bikes and their cousins E-Scooters went fast and didn’t use any gas. They were, and remain a great way to get around.

What we noticed a few common themes with E-Bike and E-Scooter accidents at our law firm:

The injuries to the rider(s) tended to be serious. This made sense given that the accidents took place at higher speeds than accidents involving nor motorized bikes. But, also like regular bikes, the riders did not have the safeguards you would see on a car (airbags, bumpers, seatbelts). The only protective gear for a cyclist (motorized on non motorized) was the helmet the person was wearing, along with any other clothing. Doctors have observed that injuries sustained in e-bike accidents tend to resemble injuries sustained in motorcycle accidents. This is significant because motorcyclists are required to have licenses and to have registered their vehicles. E-bikes are not required to be registered, and operators are not required to have driver’s licenses.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 30, 2025

Brian Goldfinger on Toronto Ambulance

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

When there is an emergency, we are trained to dial 911

I’ve had to dial 911 from different communities across Ontario. Every community seemed to answer the phone in the same way. The script went something like this:

“911 Do you need Police, Fire or Ambulance?”

It was very straight forward, direct and clear to the caller. Time was of the essence, and the caller would respond accordingly.

One of the most memorable calls I had to make to 911 was on a long term disability case. My client was being examined for discovery at a Court Reporter’s Office in London, ON. As a result of her condition, in combination with the stress of being examined for discovery, she passed out at the examiner’s table. She was being asked questions one moment; and in then next moment she completely passed out. I had to call an ambulance which took her to hospital. The paramedics (London) were fantastic, and arrived in well under 10 minutes. Needless to say, the examination for discovery was not completed that day. Everyone was shaken up. It was a pretty traumatic experience for all of the parties, including the Court Reporter and everyone in the waiting room. The defence lawyer reported what happened to her client, and the case settled soon after. This time, the pain and suffering was not compartmentalized to the Plaintiff alone. It was one of the few times where an insurance defence lawyer had a front row seat to a Plaintiff’s pain, suffering which impacted their ability to complete their job.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 24, 2025

There are Better Ways for Personal Injury Cases

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

When I was a young lawyer, I was in Court 2-4 days per week. These were not days spend in trial, although, there were some trials.

Most of the time I spent in Court had to deal with Motions (opposed, on consent or unopposed) in order to move personal injury cases forward. The cases were stalled until the motion could be heard. The motions were not “rocket science” incredible complicated. They were completely normal motions which any personal injury lawyer would need to bring. The motions were for such things as:

Motion to Amend the Statement of Claim
30.10 motion for Third Party Records
WAGG Motion for the complete, unedited police file and Crown Brief
Motion to extend to time to serve the Statement of Claim
Motion for substituted service
Motion to compel the production of undertakings, questions taken under advisement and refusals
Motion to transfer the jurisdiction of a case to another jurisdiction
Motion to have an action heard at the same time, or one after another along with another matter
Contested motions for a Plaintiff to attend a second or third defence medical examination
Motion for Judgment for the approval of an infant settlement

Continue reading →

Published on: December 19, 2025

Two Accident Benefit Cases. Two Completely Different Outcomes!

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

Cases can be similar. But not the same. No two cases are alike.

The same can be said for Judges. They can be similar, but they aren’t the same. No two Judges are alike; nor do they see things alike.

But, what the public and what personal injury lawyers look for is consistency in judicial decisions. When there are legal principals which address the same point; the same law ought to be applied; and should result in a predictable outcome once the law is applied to the case at hand.

We are going to share with you two cases, which dealt with the exact same thing. Yet, the outcomes were completely different! This doesn’t happen often, but it can happen.

Both cases involve car accident cases dealing with minors (people under the age of 18). When there is a Plaintiff, or a claimant under the age of 18; personal injury lawyers and insurance companies seek for Judges to approve of the settlement. There are many policy reasons for this. It’s a good public policy to protect the interests and the rights of minors. We want to make sure that the settlement is equitable and just. We want to make sure that the minor’s funds aren’t misappropriated. We don’t want the minors coming back to the Courts once they’ve hit the age of majority and suggest that the settlement was improvident; or something which they should never have agreed to in the first place. These policy reasons are important both for Plaintiffs and Defendants alike.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 10, 2025

Typical Run Time for Personal Injury Cases in Ontario

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

One of the most common questions which personal injury clients want to know is how long their case will take to settle.

I, Brian Goldfinger, would love to give a one size fits all answer to this question because that would make my job as a personal injury lawyer a much easier one. Unfortunately, there isn’t a one size fits all answer to such a question.

Some cases take longer to settle. Some cases take more time.

Let’s take a look at a recent decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice which provides some clues as to why cases might take more long to settle.

Here is the case of Vaillancourt v. R.K. Mooney Insurance Brokers Ltd., 2025 ONSC 6761 (CanLII). These are in fact, two cases in one, which are to be tried together, or at the same time, such as the Trial Judge best sees fit.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 2, 2025

Brian Goldfinger on Dog Bite Cases

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

Person gets bit by a dog.

Person sustains objective injury (cuts, lacerations, stitches, sutures, or even worse)

Person sustains damages and/or quantifiable loss from said dog bite injury.

Person retains a personal injury lawyer.

Person wins a judgment or settles their case outside of Court.

Person cashes in their settlement cheque.

It all sounds pretty easy….

But it’s not.

The two most difficult legal concepts for dog attack victims to grasp in a dog attack case is insurance coverage; along with the OHIP Subrogated Claim. Both concepts are not unique to dog attack cases, however, they play out in a unique way compared to other personal injury cases.

Let’s start with the idea of insurance coverage for a dog attack case.

Assume that the dog owner is either:

a) Homeless without assets

b) Not homeless, but living off Ontario Works or ODSP and residing in public housing

c) Resides in a rental apartment without any rental coverage

d) Is visiting Canada from a foreign country, and brought their dog along for the visit

e) The dog owner cannot be tracked down by Animal Control, the Plaintiff, Neighbours or Witnesses to the Dog Attack

In all of these examples, finding insurance coverage will prove to be very difficult. Having insurance coverage attach to a dog owner/defendant is very important in order for the Plaintiff to achieve compensation. A Plaintiff has to remember that you cannot get blood from a stone. Suing a party who is destitute, without assets, or unknown; will not achieve any meaningful monetary results. A Plaintiff can secure a Judgment against a person without assets. But, if the Defendant cannot satisfy that Judgment, then what good is that to a Plaintiff if their goal is to get compensation for their injuries. If the Plaintiff’s goal is achieving civil justice, then that’s a different conversation. But all civil justice will achieve is securing a monetary judgment upon which you cannot collect because the Defendant is, for lack of a better term, broke! The Judgment is simply just a piece of paper. The Defendant does not go to jail because they cannot pay out on a civil judgment in a personal injury case. Nor can a Judge order that a Defendant pay back services in kind in order to pay off the value of the Judgment; meaning; the Judge cannot for the Defendant to do odd jobs for the Plaintiff in order to pay off the debt owing. That’s not how our civil courts work for personal injury cases.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 28, 2025

How Collateral Benefits impact a Personal Injury Case

By Goldfinger Injury Lawyers

Part of the secret to defending a personal injury case, isn’t in the defence of the case on its merits itself. Rather, it’s all about trying to find alternative sources of income or benefits which the Plaintiff is entitled to so that that money offsets any potential award. This way, if even if an at fault Defendant or large insurer looses the case; their damages exposure is limited by the amount of collateral benefits which a Plaintiff has received; or which a Plaintiff is entitled to.

The term collateral benefits is often misunderstood by Plaintiffs, or disability claimants. But, it’s a very important term for any Plaintiff in a personal injury case to understand.

Think of collateral benefits as an amount of money (or benefit) which a Plaintiff is entitled to. The Plaintiff may be receiving that money; or they may not. The money might not be coming in because the Plaintiff has not applied, or thought of applying for that benefit. We see this frequently. There is no playbook for getting injured. Nor is there a playbook for what benefits to apply for after a serious accident, injury or disability claim. Many Plaintiffs don’t know that they might be entitled to benefits; or they don’t know how or when to apply for said benefits. Unfortunately neither the law nor insurers care about that. If you are entitled or eligible for said benefit, you should apply even if you didn’t know the benefit existed. The law will treat the Plaintiff as if they knew about said benefit, and as if they were eligible to receive said benefit; even if they didn’t receive it. The set off will be applied irrespective of whether or not the application for the benefit was made or not.

Continue reading →

TORONTO INJURY LAWYER BLOG