$100,000 Non-Pecuniary Assessment For Pelvic Fracture Leading to Permanent Partial Disability
Adding to this site’s archived cases addressing hip fracture non pecuniary awards, reasons for judgement were released this week by the BC Supreme Court, New Westminster Registry, assessing damages for such an injury.
In this week’s case (Dunn v. Lyon) the Plaintiff was injured in a motorcycle collision in 2008. The Defendant was fully at fault for the incident. The Plaintiff suffered from various orthopaedic injuries primarily involving her low back and hip. These went on to pose long term difficulties disabling her from her usual occupation as a server. In assessing non-pecuniary damages at $100,0000 Madam Justice Baker provided the following reasons:
[27] No medical witness testified at trial and the language used to describe Ms. Dunn’s injuries in the clinical records and in the three expert reports is technical, but counsel agreed that the primary injury can be most briefly described as multiple pelvic fractures. The fractures and other injuries are summarized on page 4 of Ms. Bos’s report as follows:
– left superior and inferior pubic rami
– right pubic tubercle
– left sacral ala
– left L5 transverse process
– widening of the left SI joint
– displaced bony fragment in the left S3 sacra foramina
– right anterior acetabular rim fracture
– haematomata involving piriformis and iliopsoas muscles
[28] I infer that none of the fractures, although serious, involved significant displacement, as Dr. O’Brian decided surgery was not required. Ms. Dunn was admitted to an orthopedic ward for bed rest although permitted to sit up in a chair provided that she did not put weight on the left side of her pelvis. Her pain was treated with a variety of drugs, including Morphine with Gravol, Oxycodone and Tylenol…
[59] Not unexpectedly, Ms. Bos’s opinion is that Ms. Dunn does not have the capacity to work either as a waitress or a janitor due to limited standing tolerance, decreased walking speed and limited stooping/bending tolerance. Her primary limitation, according to Ms. Bos, is “standing/weight bearing tolerance”. Ms. Bos’s opinion is that Ms. Dunn would benefit from vocational testing and assistance with job search…
[94] Having considered the authorities referred to and comparing the situations of the plaintiffs in those cases to that of Ms. Dunn, I award $100,000 for non-pecuniary damages.