Activities of daily living are the usual activities that you (the injured person) carried out on a daily basis before your accident. Examples include activities undertaken for health, personal hygiene, recreational activities, and housekeeping.
Related Articles:
- A Summary of the Law on Section 581 AdvancesEdmonton injury lawyer Joseph A. Nagy summarizes the importance of recent case law decisions for Section 581 advances in Alberta.
- Best Injury Law Firm Recognition 2024
- Choosing an Alberta Injury LawyerNew injury law firms are continuously entering the Alberta market. But does the lawyer or firm actually have much experience practicing injury law in Alberta? Alberta injury lawyer Joseph A. Nagy explains how you can find out.
- Personal Injury Glossary: Minor Injury Regulation
- MIR from a Common Sense Point of ViewInjury lawyer Joseph A. Nagy urges a common sense approach to determining whether minor injury claims fall within Alberta's MIR (Minor Injury Regulation).
- Patel v Certas Direct Insurance Co., [2020] A.J. No. 793In light of Patel v Certas, Edmonton injury lawyer Joseph A, Nagy examines the importance of disclosing all sources of income to obtain a Section 581 advance. Learn more...
- Serious Impairment IEdmonton injury lawyer Joseph A. Nagy on why a functional capacity evaluation can help prove a musculoskeletal injury is not, by definition, a minor injury.
- Serious Impairment II – UpdatedInjury lawyer Joseph A. Nagy discusses McLean v Parmar, 2015 ABQB 62 (CANLII), the Alberta Minor Injury Regulation, case law, and specific circumstances that determine a finding of serious impairment
- Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction, Psychological Injury, and the Minor Injury RegulationEdmonton injury lawyer Joseph A. Nagy discusses the 1 June 2018 amendment to the Minor Injury Regulation (MIR) and its impact on MIR cases.
- To Stop a Thief – What Could Go Wrong?An SEF 44 is a separate contract rider on your own insurance policy, also known as an SEF 44 Family Protection Endorsement. Learn why D’Andrea’s injuries and losses were covered by her SEF 44 Policy despite the insurer’s initial denial of coverage and arguments in both Courts.
