Walker v. Ritchie

197 O.A.C. 81 (2005)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Walker v. Ritchie

Ontario Court of Appeal
197 O.A.C. 81 (2005)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

Seventeen-year-old Stephanie Walker (plaintiff) was in high school when she was in a car accident that left her with residual paralysis and cognitive deficits. The trial court found truck driver Donald Ritchie and his employer, Harold Marcus Limited (defendants) liable and awarded Walker nearly C$5 million in damages. Over C$1 million represented future lost earnings because the trial court found Walker would never attain a competitive job due to her injuries. Based on her prior academic and athletic achievements, motivation, and familial expectations and support, the trial judge found Walker would have obtained a degree. The judge calculated that based on average university-graduate earnings, Walker would have initially earned about C$57,000 annually, with an average lifetime salary of about C$66,000. After reviewing Canadian decisions that used gender-neutral earnings tables for female claimants and then adjusted downward for negative contingencies, the judge used gender-neutral earnings tables for Walker, noting she had potential in at least two fields where women had achieved equal pay. The judge also noted that the historical female-earnings tables might not reflect accurate earning potential in the future. Recognizing that Walker might have earned a community-college instead of a university degree, the judge applied a 10 percent downward adjustment. Finally, the trial judge deducted C$100,000 as the value of work that Walker might actually be able to perform part-time in the future with her disabilities. Ritchie and his employer appealed on multiple grounds, including challenging the award of over C$1 million for lost future earnings. Specifically, Ritchie and his employer argued that the trial judge erred in assuming Walker would have attended university and in using earning statistics for all university graduates instead of only female graduates.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Gillese, Lang, J.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership