Jane has practiced in the area of insurance defence for over fifteen years. She defends insurance claims covering all aspects of general insurance liability, including motor vehicle accidents, health and disability, occupiers’ liability, slip-and-falls, social host liability, general negligence claims and statutory accident benefits with a particular focus on complex catastrophic disputes and WSIB defences.
Jane has represented clients in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Financial Services Commission of Ontario, Safety, Licensing Appeals and Standards Tribunals Ontario, Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal and at private arbitration hearings.
When she is not focused on implementing timely and cost-effective solutions on behalf of her clients, Jane enjoys spending time with her family, reading and traveling.
Lawyer, Schultz Frost LLP, Toronto, Ontario (February 2018 to present)
Lawyer, Strigberger Brown Armstrong LLP, Toronto, Ontario (January 2018)
Lawyer, Samis + Company, Toronto, Ontario (March 2017 to January 2018)
Lawyer, Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP, Toronto, Ontario (July 2009 to January 2017)
Lawyer, Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, Toronto, Ontario (March 2007 to July 2008)
Lawyer, Dutton Brock LLP, Toronto, Ontario (February 2005 to March 2007)
Non-Profit Work, Belgrade, Serbia (August 2004 to February 2005)
Lawyer, Aronovitch Macaulay Rollo LLP, Toronto, Ontario (January 2004 to July 2004)
Articling Student/Lawyer, Kerzner MacDermid McKillop LLP, Toronto, Ontario (September 2001 to January 2004)
Year of Call: 2002
LL.B., University of Ottawa (2001)
B.A., University of Toronto (1998)
Advocates’ Society, Canadian Bar Association and Canadian Defence Lawyers
The Court of Appeal rejected three grounds of appeal:
1) the trial judge did not err in restricting the scope of testimony of the appellant’s expert;
2) the trial judge did not fail to declare a mistrial due to inappropriate closing submissions by the respondent’s trial counsel; and,
3) the trial judge did not fail to provide sufficient guidance to the jury on the appropriate range for non-pecuniary damages.