J. Scott Stanley was born in Pennsylvania and, as a young child, moved with his family to Northern Saskatchewan where he grew up. Although not born in Canada, Scott is a ferociously proud Canadian.
Scott obtained a commerce degree from the University of Saskatchewan, majoring in finance and business math prior to obtaining his law degree from the University of British Columbia in 1994.
He was called to the bar in 1995 and worked at firm where he handled personal injury claims, acting for both victims and insurers. In 2002, Scott joined one of the leading insurance defence firms where he continued to act for both victims and insurers. Within 2 years of joining that firm, he became a partner and remained there until joining Murphy Battista LLP in 2007 where he now works exclusively for accident victims and their families as well as others who have claims against insurance companies.
Having acted for both sides for many years, Scott brings a balanced perspective to his work as well as a wealth of knowledge and experience.
Scott has thoroughly enjoyed his transition.
“When I represent a victim and their family, there is no doubt in my mind that I am doing the correct thing. I get to help them recapture the things that were important to them such as family life, work and hobbies. Because insurance companies increase premiums for people that cause accidents, it is my hope that my work actually encourages people to take greater care and makes the community safer. I personally found that acting for insurance companies was quite different and not as gratifying as representing victims. Often you would simply be trying to help a big company avoid paying victims or avoid its financial responsibilities to people who bought insurance policies from it. In order to do this, you often had to ask the Courts to excuse actions and behaviors that would endanger the community or that would create uncertainty for people who purchase insurance. Everyone is entitled to legal representation and I commend the lawyers who handle the difficult assignments offered by insurance companies. For me, I am grateful to be able to work with victims and their families.”
Scott recognizes the importance that work has to a person’s dignity and self esteem. A great deal of Scott’s time is spent helping his clients return to work, or to find employment that will accommodate their disabilities.
Scott gives considerable amounts of time to organizations that provide free legal advice to people who can not afford lawyers. Scott frequently acts as pro bono counsel for people who cannot afford a lawyer and who have cases that are too complex to handle by themselves.
Scott is married with two beautiful daughters, and knows first hand the importance of family. When work and family life permit, Scott enjoys biking, basketball and reading.
Click on case names to read a selection of Scott's decisions*
- Huang v. Canadian National Railway Company, 2018 BCSC 1235
Stephen Gibson, Scott Stanley, and Brandon Souza acted for the plaintiff who suffered a traumatic brain injury and a spinal cord injury that rendered her an incomplete quadriplegic. The plaintiff, an engineer, was driving across train tracks at a passive crossing when a train collided with the right side of her vehicle. The court found that Canadian National Railway Company was aware of insufficient sight lines and the dangerous nature of the specific railway crossing for many years prior to the accident and took no actions to ameliorate those risks. Despite the Plaintiff’s failure to stop at a stop sign at the railway crossing, Canadian National Railway Company was still found 60% at fault for the accident. The court awarded approximately $3,200,000 in damages.
- Abdi v. Bottomley et al., (Jury trial) June 26, 2018: Scott Stanley and Paul Bosco represented a young woman who was the victim of horrible burns following an explosion at a backyard fire pit. The tenant poured a bucket of used motor oil on the fire, causing it to explode. The landlord, who happened to be the City of Burnaby, had been warned the tenant had fires in the past, which was contrary to their own bylaw prohibiting open fires, but did nothing about this. In the course of a month-long jury trial, the court accepted the arguments of Mr. Stanley and Mr. Bosco that (1) a duty of care was owed by the landlord to the victim, a visitor to the premises, (2) it was impossible for the victim to be found at all at fault for the incident and her injuries, and (3) only basic factual questions should be put to the jury for consideration. The jury ultimately awarded the victim a total of $4.56 million.
Read the Trial Summary of Abdi v. Bottomley.
- Chen v. Lam, 2017 BCSC 2073
This case involved physical and psychological injuries sustained by a 49 year-old pedestrian on a sidewalk when a driver lost control while attempting to park, drove onto the sidewalk, and pinned the pedestrian against a wall. The pedestrian required three surgeries and had significant limitations with work as a teaching assistant and day-to-day living. The court awarded $1,064,682.07.
- Grewal v. Naumann, 2017 BCCA 158
The Defendants sought to appeal a successful judgment of $515,057 which was awarded to a young man who sustained soft tissue injuries and chronic pain. The Defendants challenged the awards for past and future loss of earning capacity arguing these could not be justified on the facts and were not adequately explained in the reasons for judgment by the trial judge. The BC Court of appeal dismissed the appeal and let the judgment stand.
- McCrory v. Komar, No. N120671 Vancouver (Jury Trial)
The Plaintiff sustained neck injuries from two car accidents which ultimately led to an inability to work. The Defendants claimed the injuries were minor, she was exaggerating or that the injuries were unrelated to the accidents. The Jury disagreed and awarded $373,600 in damages. Read the Trial Summary McCrory v. Komar.
- Rhodes v. City of Surrey, No. 127541 New Westminster (Jury Trial)
The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant municipality was negligent in its winter maintenance of the road where the accident that injured the Plaintiff had occurred. The Plaintiff claimed her injuries disabled her from working and most activities of daily living. While the Jury found the parties shared liability it awarded the Plaintiff damages of $3,576,600. The Jury also found the Plaintiff had failed to mitigate her damages. Read the Trial Summary.
- Robinson v. Bud's Bar Inc., 2015 BCSC 1767
This case involved a significant brain injury suffered by the Plaintiff. The injury was the result of a shove in retaliation for the Plaintiff teasing the Defendant in the aftermath of a bachelor party. The BC court reviewed the law regarding liability in connection with stag parties and in the result awarded the firm's client $790,000 in damages.
- Millard v. Singleton, 2015 BCSC 1015
This case involved two young girls, who were 15 and 11 at the time of the accident. Both sustained spinal fractures and one was rendered a paraplegic. Both girls were passengers in their mother’s vehicle which was struck by another vehicle that crossed into their lane during a snow storm. The driver that crossed into their lane was found 100% at fault for the accident.
- Afonina v. Jansson, 2015 BCSC 10
This case involved mild and moderate brain injuries sustained by two passengers when the driver of their vehicle lost control on the highway and crashed into a ditch. The court awarded $943,889.36 and $1,525,404.77, respectively.
- Stroszyn v. Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Company Limited, 2014 BCCA 431.
This was an appeal from a finding that a defendant driver was not insured under the insurance policy of a leasing vehicle. The Defendant driver only had a $1 million policy limit with ICBC but the Plaintiff’s damages were $1.6 million. The Plaintiff sought to obtain the additional $600k from the insurance policy of the leasing company. The Plaintiff was not successful at trial but succeeded on the appeal.
*Disclaimer: The outcome of every legal proceeding will vary according to the facts and unique circumstances in each individual case. References to successful case results are not necessarily a guarantee or indicative of future results.
Robert Wright sustained a serious head injury during a take down in a RCMP holding cell in Terrace in 2012. The BC First Nations man was left with permanent brain damage. Mr. Wright’s case received additional media coverage in 2014 when video of the holding cell incident surfaced. Since then, new allegations of the use…
As we head towards the season of work celebrations and holiday parties the prevalence of designated driver’s is likely to rise. A recent case from the BC Court of Appeal addressed the indemnification of designated drivers and has found that a passenger whose actions cause injury is a “user” of a motor vehicle and, therefore,…
The process of litigating a personal injury claim can be an incredibly stressful experience. The physical consequences of an accident can disrupt your social life, create conflict with your work and family responsibilities, and can have a dramatic effect on your mood. Further, to attempt to litigate a personal injury claim when your finances are minimal…
The CBC recently contacted me to comment on a story that perfectly represents the growing problem of insurers hiding behind complex policies. The story is covered in full at the CBC Website. However, in brief it concerns a couple, Michael and Diane Uniac, who for the past 19 years have fled their Waterloo, Ontario home…
In a recent episode of AM 650’s “The Law Show,” Stephen Gibson and I spent some time discussing fraudulent claims as well as some of the surveillance techniques that ICBC and private insurers use in personal injury litigation. Because these issues are relevant to the general public as well as personal injury victims, I decided…
View all articles posted by Skunkworks >