Representing Victims of Medical Malpractice Across Ontario

Articles Tagged

Documentation

Documentation, the contemporaneous recording of a patient’s history, examination, decisions, and care, is both a clinical obligation and, in litigation, a central source of proof. The medical record is frequently the most important evidence of what happened, and the quality of documentation can determine whether a plaintiff or a defendant is able to establish their version of events.

Allegations involving documentation arise in two ways. Inadequate documentation may itself be characterized as a departure from the standard of care, where the absence of a record undermined the continuity or safety of care. Separately, missing, incomplete, late, or altered records can attract an adverse inference, under which a court may infer that the absent material would not have assisted the party that failed to keep or produce it. The standard for adequate documentation is a matter of expert evidence and reflects accepted professional practice.

Posts tagged Documentation analyze Ontario decisions in which the adequacy or integrity of the clinical record was in issue.

14 articles View all topics →
Case header: Bradley v Wang with subtitle 'Direct observation outweighs a physician's evidence of usual practice' on a dark blue banner with 'Case Comment' and professional labels at top corners.

Bradley v Wang: A Misplaced Injection, Usual Practice Evidence, and the Mitigation Burden

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismisses Dr. Wang’s appeal in Bradley v Wang, upholding findings that a tetanus vaccine was injected in the wrong part of the arm, that the misplacement caused an adhesive capsulitis, and that no mitigation defence was made out. The decision confirms that counterfactual proof can be assembled from evidence excluding the competing explanation, and that a defendant who cannot show suitable alternative work was available loses the mitigation argument regardless of the plaintiff’s own efforts.

Read More »
Navy title card reading "CNO v Paulson: missed medications, false charting, and a three-month suspension" from paulcahill.ca.

CNO v Paulson: False Charting, Missed Medications, and the Electronic Audit Trail

A registered practical nurse admitted failures across two Guelph hospitals: an admission assessment backdated without notation, medications charted but never given, and a bladder scan reported but not performed. The CNO Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission for a three-month suspension with twelve months of oversight. What the electronic audit trail proved, and where a discipline finding stops short of a civil claim.

Read More »
Navy title card reading "Clarey v Gillis, A devastating outcome that was not negligence" from paulcahill.ca

Clarey v Gillis: A Near-Fatal Surgical Complication and No Breach of the Standard of Care

Norman Clarey nearly died after a bowel resection led to a failed anastomosis and a permanent stoma. A Prince Edward Island court nonetheless dismissed his negligence, breach of contract, and informed consent claims, finding Dr. Gillis met the standard of care throughout and that causation was not proven. As an out-of-province decision it is persuasive but not binding in Ontario, though it applies largely Ontario and Supreme Court of Canada authority.

Read More »
Have a Case Like This?

Concerned about medical negligence?
Talk to Paul directly.

Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.