Law360 Canada (May 17, 2024, 11:03 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from judgment holding him liable for damages suffered by Henry, his former patient, arguing that jury's finding that he breached applicable standard of care was plainly unreasonable and unjust. Henry was diagnosed with a spinal dural arteriovenous ("SDAV") fistula in his thoracic spinal cord. Henry had come under the care of the appellant, a neurologist. Henry’s SDAV fistula diagnosis was confirmed with a further Magnetic resonance imaging (“MRI”) and consultation with an interventional neuroradiologist. The fistula in Henry's spine was surgically repaired. Henry underwent physical therapy and recovered his ability to walk. However, his legs remained weak and spastic. Henry and his spouse sued the appellant and others involved in his care. The action was discontinued or dismissed against all defendants except the appellant by the time a trial took place before the trial judge and a jury. The trial judge gave the jury lengthy instructions, which reflected the parties' submissions at the pre-charge conference. The respondents' experts on liability and causation included Doctor Young, a neurologist, and Doctor Lee, a neuroradiologist. After deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in Henry's favour....