Guthmiller v. Krahn, 2000 ABQB 444

• Judge: McIntyre, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: June 27, 2000
• Citations: 2000 ABQB 444;(2000), 268 A.R. 369 (QB)

Guthmiller v. Krahn (2000), 268 A.R. 369 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. AU.072

Perry Guthmiller (plaintiff) v. David Krahn and Anna Krahn (defendants)

(Action No. 9708-00897; 2000 ABQB 444)

Indexed As: Guthmiller v. Krahn

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Medicine Hat

McIntyre, J.

June 27, 2000.

Summary:

The plaintiff suffered significant soft tissue injuries in a motor vehicle accident.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench assessed the plaintiff's damages and awarded judgment accordingly.

Damage Awards - Topic 178

Injury and death - Neck injuries - Whip­lash - [See Damage Awards - Topic 179 ].

Damage Awards - Topic 179

Injury and death - Neck injuries - Soft tissue injuries - The plaintiff suffered significant soft tissue injuries in a motor vehicle accident - The plaintiff's condition had deteriorated - The chronic pain would not go away, but could only be managed and he had a permanent partial disability - The plaintiff could not stand still for more than 20 minutes, his neck was in constant pain, he had constant headaches, his neck muscles were often in spasm and he now had an abnormal head position (tortcollis) -He required significant medication - His homelife had deteriorated and he could not work as he once did - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench awarded the plaintiff $65,000 general damages - See paragraphs 29 to 33.

Damage Awards - Topic 492.1

Injury and death - General damage awards - Pretrial income loss - The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident on his last day of work as a track hoe operator - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that in calcu­lating past loss of wages, it was appropri­ate to include unemployment insurance benefits the plain­tiff received because his ability to work qualified him for unem­ployment income - See paragraph 35.

Damages - Topic 1413

Special damages - Loss of income of unemployed person - [See Damage Awards - Topic 492.1 ].

Evidence - Topic 1527

Hearsay rule - Hearsay rule exceptions and exclusions - Where admission of hearsay necessary and evidence reliable - The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident on his last day of work with Top-Notch Construction - The plaintiff testified that he had been laid off and his record of employment stated that he was laid off - An investigator for the defendants had had a telephone conservation with an employee of Top-Notch (Dymond), the gist of which was that the plaintiff had quit Top-Notch and would not be hired again - Dymond's statement that the plaintiff had quit was hearsay as the plaintiff had apparently told someone else at Top-Notch that he had quit - Dymond was now dead - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the evidence of the conversation with Dymond was not sufficiently reliable to admit into evidence absent a signed written statement, an opportunity for Dymond to correct, or a warning to him of the impor­tance of the conservation - Further, Dy­mond's statement that the plaintiff had quit was double hearsay - See paragraphs 11 to 17.

Evidence - Topic 1626

Hearsay rule - Hearsay rule exceptions and exclusions - Statements of deceased per­sons - General principles - [See Evidence -Topic 1527 ].

Evidence - Topic 4023

Witnesses - General - Credibility - Oath-helping or oath-attacking - The plaintiff suffered soft tissue injuries in a motor vehicle accident - A psychologist's report suggested that the plaintiff was exaggerat­ing his condition because he failed certain tests - The defendants put forward the psychologist's evidence to attack the plain­tiff's credibility - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that to use the psy­chologist's evidence in the way proposed by the defendants seemed to be the reverse of oath-helping (a long vanished practice) -The purpose of the testing was not to see if the plaintiff was credible in court - Further, the evidence was that more than 50% of chronic pain sufferers failed those tests - The court did not find that the plaintiff was exaggerating his pain - See paragraphs 18 to 22.

Cases Noticed:

Aschacker v. Evans et al. (1998), 213 A.R. 131 (Q.B.), affd. (1999), 250 A.R. 138; 213 W.A.C. 138 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. K.G.B., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 740; 148 N.R. 241; 61 O.A.C. 1; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 257, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. F.J.U., [1995] 3 S.C.R. 764; 186 N.R. 365; 85 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Marquard (D.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 223; 159 N.R. 81; 66 O.A.C. 161; 25 C.R.(4th) 1; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 22].

Webb v. Exide Electronics Ltd. et al. (1999), 177 N.S.R.(2d) 147; 542 A.P.R. 147 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

N.C. and J.C. v. Blank (1998), 64 O.T.C. 241 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 35].

Harlow v. Thompson, [1995] B.C.J. No. 2379, refd to. [para. 35].

McDonald v. Nguyen (1991), 138 A.R. 81 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 35].

Labbee et al. v. Peters et al. (1997), 201 A.R. 241 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 39].

O'Hara et al. v. Belanger (1989), 98 A.R. 86 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 43].

Counsel:

Bruce Hill, for the plaintiff;

Frank A. Mason, for the defendants.

This matter was heard before McIntyre, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Medicine Hat, who delivered the following decision on June 27, 2000.