Government files motion to limit moose collision plaintiffs

Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Province wants two-year limit, lawyer Ches Crosbie to argue for 10-year period

Ches Crosbie. — File photo

St. John’s lawyer Ches Crosbie will be presenting arguments in court Monday against a provincial government motion to limit plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit over moose-vehicle collisions to a two-year period.

Crosbie said in a news release government’s motion, if approved, would bar representative Ben Bellows, who was rendered quadriplegic during his moose-vehicle collision in 2003, as well as many other class members.

“Government will be arguing to reduce the class period to a two-year limitation period. This way, people included in the class action would be limited to those whose moose-vehicle collisions happened in the two-year time period before the class action was filed,” Crosbie said.

Crosbie will be arguing that the negligence of government “was not reasonably discoverable in that two-year time period and the class period should be 10 years.”

If government’s motion is approved, he said it will remove all class members whose accidents occurred earlier than January 5th, 2009.

The court hearing starts 10 a.m. Monday at Newfoundland Supreme Court Trial Division in St. John’s.

Crosbie has also scheduled a news conference for Tuesday morning at 10 a.m. to discuss the issue with reporters and upcoming January trial.

Organizations: Supreme Court Trial Division

Geographic location: Newfoundland

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Frank
    September 27, 2013 - 19:23

    This guy is a parasite! What a sham of a lawsuit. Blaming the government for peoples poor driving habits. What's next??

    • gord
      September 27, 2013 - 22:08

      Agree

  • Steve Mclean
    September 27, 2013 - 18:47

    Mr. Crosbie is an ambulance chaser. His family must be embaressed with his actions. Maybe he should be suing the government over hydroplaning as more accidents are caused by this than moose. SMM.

  • Don II
    September 27, 2013 - 17:13

    It appears that the Government of Newfoundland and their sharp lawyers are at their usual tricks and are looking to use any legal loophole and shopping for a friendly Judge to get them off the hook. The unethical and ruthless Government of Newfoundland wants to absolve itself of any responsibility for negligence and vicarious liability related to these tragic moose accidents which occurred on public highways and roads under the jurisdiction and control of the Government! If justice is served, the Government of Newfoundland will be defeated in Court and made to pay!

  • Cashin Delaney
    September 27, 2013 - 14:09

    If this gets recognized, what other negligence will the people (because you sue your citizens, when you sue the government) get charged with paying for. In new construction laws, those who are negligent are punished, as well as the company. If Crosby can prove nothing other than the normal government negligence that causes meltdowns, train derailments, or pipeline bursts, than the best they can lobby for is a survivors fund for medical help, which should, and could easily exist. Getting lawyer-fought-for money for hitting a moose will make it no better than a hunt on wheels, with our own money siphoned, with 25% off the top going to lawyers. Crosby has the common touch down pat, like Bill Rowe, or the Danny, just a irrespectively, humbler and gentler style. Setup a survivors fund, lobby for the changes that work, and leave these solicitors to create their own valid wealth, not leech ours! Look after you own NL, not recycling money to cure the class active rage of victims. I propose that this is preying on victims, inveighing their government at a premium to the people.

  • Hank
    September 27, 2013 - 14:06

    Who is at fault here ? the Government ? The Government are the people ! Why should I or any other person pay taxes to pay for an accident which is supposed to have been caused by a moose ? or a deer or bear, An insurance policy should be put in place to have to pay for that, the auto insurance should carry a section to pay for that !

  • sparky
    September 27, 2013 - 12:55

    Why can`t this province do as they do in other places in this messed-up-world & have a MOOSE KILL! Its not that hard! The moose are not native to NFLD, they were brought here by another 'not-so-smart government'. Now its going to cost BIG money if crosbie can get his way, people are going to walk away with big money!, so have a large moose kill!

  • Fred Penner
    September 27, 2013 - 12:34

    Newer vehicles have "event data recorders" which record speed etc prior to accidents.

  • gerry
    September 27, 2013 - 11:09

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I personally can't see how the government is at fault if I hit a mose while driving....

  • Fred
    September 27, 2013 - 10:52

    I fail to undersatnd how the government is responsible for my moose collision. The roads are "use at own risk". My insurance will compensate me for damage done to my vehicle.

  • Hank
    September 27, 2013 - 10:39

    Who is at fault here ? the Government ? The Government are the people ! Why should I or any other person pay taxes to pay for an accident which is supposed to have been caused by a moose ? or a deer or bear, An insurance policy should be put in place to have to pay for that, the auto insurance should carry a section to pay for that !

  • JacksonII
    September 27, 2013 - 09:36

    I have mixed emotions on this subject. While I fault the government in some aspects I still feel drivers should just slow down when conditions are not appropriate for normal posted speed limits.