ICBC Hip and Leg Injury Lawyers 1-877-602-9900
ICBC hip and leg injury lawyers know that car accidents cause a number of types of injuries. ICBC hip and leg injuries are very common in ICBC car accidents. ICBC Hip and Leg Injury Lawyers understand that the force of an ICBC car accident often causes the ICBC car accident victim’s legs to hit the dashboard with tremendous and sudden force, resulting in Vancouver hip and leg injuries such as fractured femurs, hip dislocations, stress fractures, ligament tears, cartilage damage and muscle strains. Car crash hip and leg injuries are frequently extremely devastating as they affect one’s quality of life by limiting movement abilities and by causing prolonged severe pain and discomfort. The discomfort and pain caused by Vancouver hip and leg injuries can be chronic and life lasting. Vancouver hip and injuries are tough to treat and in some instances a total hip replacement and other surgery is the only solution. The key is to get medical and legal help immediately.
ICBC Hip and Leg Injury Lawyers
In the case of Bramley v. Lee, 2016 BCSC 1105 (CanLII) the plaintiff Mr. Bramley suffered injuries to his lower back, right leg, right hip, and genitals during a motor vehicle accident on Kingsway avenue in Port Coquitlam. Our ICBC Hip and Leg Injury Lawyers note that the most serious of these injuries was his hip injury, which continued to be affected by symptoms throughout the time of the trial. Mr. Bramley sought damages for pain and suffering, loss of past and future income earning capacity, and special damages. At trial he was awarded roughly $86000 for his injuries, primarily for his pain and suffering.
ICBC Hip and Leg Injury Lawyers Explain How Clinical Records Affect Damage Awards
 In Edmondson v. Payer, 2011 BCSC 118 (CanLII), aff’d 2012 BCCA 114 (CanLII), N. Smith J. provided instructive commentary on the evidentiary use of clinical records including the relevance of their absence. At para. 37 he remarked:
The same applies to a complete absence of a clinical record. Except in severe or catastrophic cases, the injury at issue is not the only thing of consequence in the plaintiff’s life. There certainly may be cases where a plaintiff’s description of his or her symptoms is clearly inconsistent with a failure to seek medical attention, permitting the court to draw adverse conclusions about the plaintiff’s credibility. But a plaintiff whose condition neither deteriorates nor improves is not obliged to constantly bother busy doctors with reports that nothing has changed, particularly if the plaintiff has no reason to expect the doctors will be able to offer any new or different treatment. Similarly, a plaintiff who seeks medical attention for unrelated conditions is not obliged to recount the history of the accident and resulting injury to a doctor who is not being asked to treat that injury and has no reason to be interested in it. Having carefully considered Mr. Bramley’s testimony concerning his sleep disturbance, I was not troubled by the absence of complaints of sleep disturbance in Dr. Marazzi’s clinical records. Mr. Bramley explained that it was the hip pain that was disturbing his sleep and his focus was on treating the hip pain as the underlying cause. He was consistently reporting hip pain to Dr. Marazzi and he was being treated for hip pain. While some patients might mention every consequence of a particular injury or symptom to their doctor, the failure to mention every consequence of a symptom, particularly where the symptom itself is mentioned repeatedly, is not so clearly inconsistent with the existence of the consequence as to permit an adverse inference to be drawn.
Causation Must Be proven to Win Explain ICBC Hip and Leg Injury Lawyers
The Court held that the law for a BC car accident case is that An injured ICBC car accident victim “does not have to establish that the accident is the sole cause of the injuries. So long as a plaintiff proves that a defendant’s negligence is part of the cause of an injury, beyond the “de minimus” range, the defendant will be fully liable for the harm suffered, even if other causal factors, which the defendant is not responsible for, contributed to the harm” and went on to make the following findings and conclusions:
 In summary, I make the following findings on causation and the current state of Mr. Bramley’s condition:
- Mr. Bramley sustained an injury to the greater trochanteric area of his right hip in the accident, which developed into trochanteric pain syndrome. He suffered from persistent, significant right hip pain until 2011, when the pain started to improve after the cortisone injection and the switch in medication to Vimovo. The hip pain continued to improve after Mr. Bramley began strengthening exercises in 2013, leaving him with lingering symptoms that he has learned to live with.
- Mr. Bramley suffered a soft tissue injury to his low back in the accident that initially resulted in significant low back pain extending into his right leg for several months, which gradually improved and ultimately resolved by early 2012.
- Mr. Bramley suffered acid reflux symptoms as a result of medications he took for his hip and low back pain, which plagued him for about a year, in 2010 to 2011, until he switched medications and began taking Vimovo.
- After the accident, the pain in Mr. Bramley’s hip began to interfere with his sleep. This became progressively worse and eventually developed into a sleep disturbance that left him fatigued by late 2009. There was no material improvement in his sleep until after the hip pain began to improve in 2011. By early 2012, Mr. Bramley’s sleep had returned to normal. Subsequently, Mr. Bramley suffered again from a significant sleep disturbance, but that was a result of sleep apnea and unrelated to the accident.