Lindquist et al. v. Riendeau et al., (1987) 60 Sask.R. 60 (CA)

• Judge: Vancise, Wakeling and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: May 26, 1987
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1987), 60 Sask.R. 60 (CA)

Lindquist v. Riendeau (1987), 60 Sask.R. 60 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Ruby Riendeau and Douglas L. Riendeau (appellants/defendants) v. Glen A. Lindquist, Lori Lynn Lindquist and Jeffrey Allan Baer Lindquist, Kris Albert Lindquist and Deanna Rae Lindquist, all infants suing by their next friend Glen A. Lindquist (respondents/plaintiffs)

(No. 9001)

Indexed As: Lindquist et al. v. Riendeau et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Vancise, Wakeling and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A.

May 26, 1987.

Summary:

A father, mother and three children sued the defendants for injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident. The percentage of liability of the plaintiffs and defendants was agreed upon. A jury assessed the quantum of damages to be awarded the father, mother and one child. At the opening of trial and before jury selection the defendants applied for an adjournment, to enable them to obtain an independent medical examination of the plaintiff mother and to further examine her for discovery. The trial judge refused the adjournment. The trial proceeded and the father and mother were awarded damages; the child was awarded no damages. The defendants appealed the damages awarded to the mother for pain and suffering, future loss of earnings and future care. The plaintiffs crossappealed the lack of damages awarded to the child.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed both the defendants' appeal and the plaintiffs' cross-appeal. The court ordered a new trial on the assessment of the mother's damages, on the ground that the failure of the trial judge to grant an adjournment resulted in an unfair trial. The court further ordered that the mother be independently examined by a doctor and further examined on discovery. The court also ordered a new trial on the assessment of damages for the child.

Practice - Topic 5066

Conduct of trial - Adjournments - Adjournment to prepare evidence for trial - Four days before a jury trial for an assessment of damages in a personal injury case, the plaintiffs disclosed a recent medical report - The trial judge refused the defendants an adjournment at the opening of trial, for time for an independent medical examination of the injured plaintiff and for further discovery - At trial the recent medical report was viewed with importance, to the defendants' severe disadvantage - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the refusal of the adjournment resulted in an unfair trial - The court ordered a new trial respecting the plaintiff's damages and also granted the defendants other requested relief.

Cases Noticed:

Edmeades v. Thames Board Mills Ltd., [1969] All E.R. 127, refd to. [para. 10].

Counsel:

P. Foley, for the appellant;

M. Dovell and J. Watson, for the respondent.

These appeals were heard before Vancise, Wakeling and Sherstobitoff, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered orally by Wakeling, J.A., on May 26, 1987.