Effects Of Injuries On Plaintiff More Important Than Attaching Monetary Value To Specific Diagnoses

In McKay v. Powell and Seher, the Plaintiff was injured in several motor vehicle collisions, and brought ICBC claims for damages. Experts differed in their specific diagnoses of the Plaintiff, however was what certain was that the Plaintiff suffered injuries that detrimentally affected her life. The Court, in its ruling, showed that what is important is the effects of the injuries on the Plaintiff, more so than trying to attach specific monetary value to a specific diagnosis.


[44]         Clearly the cumulative effects of the three accidents in this case have placed Ms. McKay in a position where she has chronic pain disorder as stated by Dr. Mosewich, regardless of the lack of consensus as to whether there is possibly a thoracic outlet syndrome or fibromyalgia in play. No expert has ventured a specific prognosis as to complete resolution of her symptoms. Dr. Wade holds out a hope that further rehabilitation with exercises will reduce her symptoms while participating in daily activities, recreation and occupation. Dr. Mosewich recommended regular exercise and physiotherapy, but recognized a continuing need for pain modulating medication. If Dr. Apel’s diagnosis of fibromyalgia is correct, the plaintiff’s condition will wax and wane, but there will be no full recovery.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *