Anda di halaman 1dari 8

Court File No.

3254/14

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE


B E T W E E N:

JAMES KING and PATRICIA KING Plaintiffs and FRANKLIN ROSE and BRIDGET ROSE Defendants

STATEMENT OF CLAIM
TO THE DEFENDANT(S): A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the Plaintiff. The Claim made against you is set out in the following pages. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for you must prepare a Statement of Defence in Form 18A prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, serve it on the Plaintiffs lawyer or, where the Plaintiff does not have a lawyer, serve it on the Plaintiff, and file it, with proof of service, in this court office, WITHIN TWENTY DAYS after this Statement of Claim is served on you, if you are served in Ontario. If you are served in another province or territory of Canada or in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your Statement of Defence is forty days. If you are served outside Canada and the United States of America, the period is sixty days.

-2Instead of serving and filing a Statement of Defence, you may serve and file a Notice of Intent to Defend in Form 18B prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. This will entitle you to ten more days within which to serve and file your Statement of Defence. IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN AGAINST YOU IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING BUT ARE UNABLE TO PAY LEGAL FEES, LEGAL AID MAY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU BY CONTACTING A LOCAL LEGAL AID OFFICE.

Date

February 14, 2014

Issued by Local Registrar Address of court office:

102 East Main Street Welland, Ontario L3B 3W6

TO:

Franklin Rose 123 South Street Welland, Ontario L1W 5S2

AND TO: Bridget Rose 123 South Street Welland, Ontario L1W 5S2

-3-

CLAIM
1. (a) The plaintiffs claim as follows: For the plaintiff, James King: (i) (ii) (iii) General damages in the amount of $600,000.00; Damages for past and future economic loss in the amount of $200,000.00; Damages for out-of-pocket expenses in an amount to be quantified at a reasonable time prior to trial; (b) For the plaintiff, Patricia King: (i) Damages in the amount of $ 25,000.00, pursuant to section 61 of the Family Law Act of Ontario, R.S.O. 1990, c. 3, as amended; (c) For all the plaintiffs: (i) Prejudgment postjudgment interest in accordance with sections 128 and 129 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C. 43, as amended; (ii) (iii) 2. The costs of this action on a substantial indemnity scale, and; Such further and other relief as this Honourable Court may deem just.

The plaintiff, James King, is an individual, ordinarily resident in the City of Welland, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, in the Province of Ontario.

-43. The plaintiff, Patricia King, is an individual, ordinarily resident in the City of Welland, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, in the Province of Ontario. Patricia Johnson is the mother of the plaintiff, James King. 4. The defendant, Franklin Rose, is an individual, ordinarily resident in the City of Welland, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, in the Province of Ontario. 5. The defendant, Bridget Rose, is an individual, ordinarily resident in the City of Welland, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, in the Province of Ontario. Bridget Rose is the mother of the defendant, Franklin Rose. At all material times, the defendant, Bridget Rose, was the owner of the 2010 Honda Goldwing, Ontario licence #BBB10, hereinafter referred to as the motor vehicle. 6. The plaintiffs state that on August 10, 2013 at approximately 10:00 P.M., the plaintiff, James King attended the defendants home, located at 123 South Street, Welland, Ontario. The plaintiffs further state that at approximately 1:00 A.M. the defendant, Franklin Rose, offered to the plaintiff, James King, a ride to a nearby McDonalds restaurant. 7. The plaintiffs state that due to the nature of the visit to the defendants home, the defendant, Franklin Rose, decided to go behind the wheel of the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol. The plaintiffs further state that the defendant, Franklin Rose, failed to offer the plaintiff, James King a helmet. 8. The plaintiffs state that while traveling northbound on South Street, approximately a quarter mile from the defendants residence, the defendant, Franklin Rose, lost control of the motor vehicle due to the speed of travel, veering to the right and striking the curb

-5adjacent to 572 South Street, launching the plaintiff, James King, off the motor vehicle, and causing him to strike his head on a large stone, forming part of a rock garden in the front yard of where the accident occurred, resulting in loss of consciousness. 9. As a result of the accident, the defendant, Franklin Rose, was charged with careless driving, pursuant to section 130 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, as amended, for failing to operate the motor vehicle without due care and attention, as well as failing to have reasonable consideration for other persons using the roadway. 10. The plaintiffs further state that the defendant, Franklin Rose, has no experience driving a motorcycle and did not have a proper license to operate the motor vehicle. As such, the accident was caused by the negligence of the defendant, Franklin Rose, for whose negligence the defendant, Bridget Rose, is at law responsible. Particulars of the negligence on the part of the defendant, Franklin Rose, are as follows: (a) (b) He willingly took the wheel of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol. He failed to ensure the safety of the passenger while operating the motor vehicle by not providing the plaintiff, James King, with a helmet. (c) (d) 11. He operated the motor vehicle without proper licensing. He failed to operate the defendants motor vehicle with due care and attention.

In addition to the above allegations, the plaintiffs plead and rely upon section 192 of the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, as amended, as well as section 267.1 of the Insurance Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. I.8.

-612. The plaintiffs state that as a result of the subject accident, the plaintiff, James King, has sustained permanent serious disfigurement, and permanent serious impairment of physical, mental, and/or psychological function. Particulars of the injuries sustained by James King as a result of the subject accident are as follows: (a) (b) (c) 13. Fracture to the right wrist, Mild traumatic brain injury, concussion, and; Post-concussion syndrome.

As a result of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff, James King, he has experienced and will continue to experience pain, suffering, and a diminution in his enjoyment of life. He has been unable to participate, at all, or to the extent he was able to prior to the accident, in his ordinary recreational, social, athletic and household activities.

14.

As a further result of the subject accident, the plaintiff, James King, has undergone and will continue to undergo, hospitalization, therapy, and rehabilitation.

15.

As a further result of the subject accident, the plaintiff, James King, has incurred and will continue to incur expenses for hospitalization, medication, therapy, and rehabilitation as well as expenses for missed time in academic pursuits. Full particular of these expenses will be provided at a reasonable time prior to trial.

16.

As a further result of the accident, the plaintiff, James King, has suffered a loss of educational investment, a loss of competitive advantage in the academic field, and a diminution in his academic potential, and subsequently, his income earning capacity.

-717. As a further result of the damages and injuries suffered by James King, the plaintiff, Patricia King, has suffered a loss of the care and companionship she could have expected to receive from the plaintiff had the subject accident not occurred. In addition, Patricia King has provided, and will continue to provide, nursing, housekeeping, and other services to James King, such services having been necessitated by the injuries to the plaintiff, James King, causing an economic loss in lost wages due to an unpaid leave of absence.

DATED: February 14, 2014

BELLANTINO AND DROZDOSKI BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS 10 John Street St. Catharines ON L4R 5R5 Nancy Bellantino (LSUC #4578) Tel: 905-564-9876 Fax: 905-564-9999 Lawyers for the plaintiffs
RCP-E 14A (July 1, 2007)

KING and others Plaintiffs

-and-

ROSE and others Defendants Court File No. 3254/14 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE PROCEEDING COMMENCED AT WELLAND

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

BELLANTINO AND DROZDOSKI BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS 10 John Street St. Catharines ON L4R 5R5 Nancy Bellantino (LSUC #4578) Tel: 905-564-9876 Fax: 905-564-9999 Lawyers for the plaintiffs
RCP-E 4C (July 1, 2007)