The trial judge weighed the evidence of both experts, in view of all the other evidence before her, and preferred the evidence of the appellant’s expert. She declined to infer causation and concluded that the respondents had not proved that their psychiatric disorders were caused by the appellant’s actions. The trial judge’s weighing of the expert evidence attracts appellate deference: see Hacopian-Armen Estate v. Mahmoud, 2021 ONCA 545, at paras. 66-68. I see no basis for this court to intervene. Issue #3: Did the trial judge err in her assessment of damages?
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.