Doctor denies allegations of racism made by Tataskweyak Cree Nation man in 2024 lawsuit
Social Sharing
A doctor in The Pas has denied allegations of racism in response to a lawsuit filed by a Cree man who accused the physician of mistaking symptoms of acute appendicitis for a hangover.
Dr. Navrup Aery has asked the Court of King's Bench to dismiss the case in a statement of defence filed on March 14 in Winnipeg.
Justin Flett, 46, a Tataskweyak Cree Nation member, filed a statement of claim against Aery on Dec. 19, 2024, claiming the ER doctor told him he didn't treat hangovers as he checked Flett's stomach for sharp abdominal pain and nausea In January 2023.
Northern Regional Health Authority and the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority are also named as defendants in the lawsuit.
According to a statement of defence, Aery said Flett had reported drinking heavily over the previous two days before assessment in hospital, but said he "did not find the patient to be intoxicated."
Aery denies allegations of racist comments and negligence, asserting the care he provided was appropriate due to the results of the examination.
Flett arrived at St. Anthony's General Hospital ER in The Pas on Jan. 15, 2023 and reported feeling unwell, nauseous and dizzy, the statement of defence says.
He was triaged at 7:45 a.m. and was assessed about an hour later by Aery, who had had treated him the day before for different concern, pain in one of Flett's hands.
In his statement of defence Aery says Flett demonstrated only mild discomfort in the upper right quadrant of his abdomen during palpitations, denied any fever, chills or chest pain, and did not appear in distress or ask for pain medication.
Laboratory results from tests ordered to determine Flett's condition were reassuring, the statement of defence says.
"Based on the plaintiff's clinical presentation, the physical examination, and the lab results, Dr. Aery diagnosed the plaintiff with general, non-emergent abdominal pain," the statement of defence says.
The plaintiff told Aery he was travelling to Winnipeg that day, according to the statement of defence, and the doctor encouraged Flett to follow up with his general practitioner in the city and to go to emergency if his condition worsened.
In Flett's statement of claim, the plaintiff says he travelled to Winnipeg by bus at about 11:00 a.m. to seek care after he was discharged by Aery, as there was no where else to go in The Pas for treatment on a Sunday.
'Damages excessive and too remote'
A diagnosis of acute appendicitis was confirmed at Seven Oaks Hospital about 4:00 a.m. in Winnipeg, requiring urgent surgery, according to the plaintiff's statement of claim. Flett's appendix burst before he could be transferred to Grace Hospital for the operation, leading to an infection.
Aery says he had no further involvement or knowledge of Flett's treatment after he left St. Anthony's General Hospital ER in The Pas, according to the statement of defence, and denies that he breached any fiduciary duty of care to the plaintiff.
"Furthermore the plaintiff has failed to plead sufficient facts to make out the necessary elements of the claim for breach of fiduciary duty," said the statement of defence.
Aery denies any damages or injuries sustained by Flett were a result of his care, and any injuries or damages the plaintiff sustained were not caused by Aery or anyone he's responsible to under the law.
The statement of defence says Flett "failed to take appropriate steps to properly mitigate his losses," and says the lawsuit does not meet legal threshold required.
"Such damages as pleaded are excessive and too remote," the statement of defence says, and the lawsuit should be dismissed, with costs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Cision Canada
28-05-2025
- Cision Canada
Canadian Medical Association files legal challenge to protect the rights of young patients and families to make medical decisions
CALGARY, AB , May 28, 2025 /CNW/ - Today, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA), along with three Alberta doctors, will file a constitutional challenge to Alberta's Bill 26, to protect the relationship between patients, their families and doctors when it comes to making treatment decisions. Bill 26 directs physicians on how to deliver gender-affirming care to people under 18, down to which medications they can use, when and how. This is an historic and unprecedented government intrusion into the physician-patient relationship and requires doctors to follow the law rather than clinical guidelines, the needs of patients and their own conscience. "Medicine is a calling. Doctors pursue it because they are compelled to care for and promote the well-being of patients," says CMA President Dr. Joss Reimer . "When a government bans specific treatments, it interferes with a doctor's ability to empower patients to choose the best care possible." Doctors are governed by the highest standards of ethics and professionalism. Under Bill 26, they are now powerless to provide independent expertise, clinical guidance and treatment options when it comes to gender-affirming care. "This legislation has put me and many of my colleagues in a state of moral crisis," says Dr. Jake Donaldson , a Calgary -based family physician providing gender-affirming care to about 40 adolescents. "These patients are a vulnerable group that already face significant and disproportionate discrimination, violence and mental health challenges," he adds. "Bill 26 commands physicians to stand on the sidelines and watch them suffer." This legal challenge is not just about Alberta and gender-affirming care. Health decisions are complex and unique to everyone. They are deeply personal and must be made by patients and their families, in partnership with their health provider – not by politicians. The CMA felt it had no choice but to step in before this kind of political interference expands to other national health issues, such as vaccination, reproductive health, medical assistance in dying, or even cancers or surgeries resulting from lifestyle choices. At a time when the Canadian health system is under significant pressure, the Alberta government should be spending its time, energy and resources on the 650,000 people in the province without a family doctor, not on the few hundred vulnerable youth seeking medical assistance. This is a misplaced priority that doesn't reflect the health care needs of people living in Alberta , and more broadly, in Canada . Background The CMA has filed an application with the Court of King's Bench for the judicial review of Alberta Bill 26 the Health Statutes Amendment Act, 2024 and its proposed changes to the Health Professions Act R.S.A 2000 with the Court of King's Bench. The CMA asserts that Bill 26 and its proposed changes violate the freedom of conscience of physicians in Alberta contrary to section 2(a) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Protecting freedom of conscience in medical practice ensures doctors can provide medical guidance and treatments in the best interest of patients, without facing disciplinary action. In Canada , physicians are governed by the CMA Code of Ethics and Professionalism (the "Code"). First established in 1868, the Code articulates the ethical and professional responsibilities of the medical profession. It is founded on and affirms the core values, commitments and principles that physicians must uphold as members of their profession. About the CMA The Canadian Medical Association leads a national movement with physicians who believe in a better future of health. Our ambition is a sustainable, accessible health system where patients are partners, a culture of medicine that elevates equity, diversity and wellbeing, and supportive communities where everyone has the chance to be healthy. We drive change through advocacy, giving and knowledge sharing – guided by values of collaboration and inclusion. SOURCE Canadian Medical Association To schedule an interview or for further information, please contact: CMA Media Relations: [email protected]; Elena Gabrysz, 514-839-7296; Eric Lewis, 506-566-1671
CBC
03-05-2025
- CBC
Closing arguments heard in $5B First Nations housing class action lawsuit
Chiefs and citizens from First Nations across Canada involved in a class action lawsuit against Canada for failing to provide adequate housing descended on Winnipeg this week to have their voices heard. The lawsuit, which was heard in Federal Court this week in Winnipeg, alleges Canada has "deliberately underfunded housing on reserves," while simultaneously isolating First Nations by imposing restrictions on their ability to provide housing for themselves. St. Theresa Point First Nation in Manitoba and Sandy Lake First Nation in northwestern Ontario filed the lawsuit in 2023. Over 100 First Nations have opted in to the class action. Elder Delores Fiddler of Sandy Lake First Nation was one of many to share the impact of the housing crisis has had on her family. Her 19-year-old granddaughter died from Blastomycosis, a fungal infection contracted by inhaling mould spores. "They did an autopsy on her. They told me why she died. She died of that mould. Do you guys have a mouldy house they told us? Yeah, it's all mouldy," said Fiddler. "We make a tent outside to have fresh air so we don't have to breathe in whatever is inside our home." Jonovan Flett, a father of two from St. Theresa Point, grew up in ten different houses in the community. Flett explained that he had to constantly move because everywhere his family ended up was overcrowded. "None of this is normal," said said Flett. "It's not normal for babies to be covered in rashes because their houses are infested with mould." Grand Chief Alex McDougall of Anisininew Okimawin, an organization that represents St. Theresa Point and other Anisininew Nations in the same region, said, the issue is a "longstanding failure" of the federal government and the provincial partners "who must be reminded of the sacred obligation embedded in our treaties." "Canada forced us onto the reserves, which were slivers of our traditional territories and they deprived us from maintaining our self-sustaining ways of life that have been practised by our ancestors for thousands of years," said co-lead plaintiff, Chief Raymond Flett of St. Theresa Point. "Now, Canada says it has no responsibility to provide housing on reserve." The class action is seeking $5 billion in damages. "The Plaintiffs urged the Court to recognize that the housing crisis on reserve is the direct result of state conduct, and asked the Court to recognize that Canada has a legal duty to take reasonable measures to ensure the Class has access to adequate housing," said Alana Robert, plaintiff's legal counsel, in an email sent to CBC Indigenous. Canada said in its statement of defense it acknowledges St. Theresa Point's claim that some housing sub-divisions lack running water and sewerage service today but that the claim should be dismissed. "Canada does not owe any legal obligations or duties to build and maintain houses on-reserve," the statement of defense read. The final arguments were heard on Thursday. A final decision is expected in the coming months.
CBC
27-04-2025
- CBC
Winnipeg family claims 'excruciating' skin wounds linked to sunscreen, sues manufacturer
A Winnipeg family who went on a vacation hoping to relax and enjoy their time away ended up experiencing unbearable pain on their skin which they claim was caused by the sunscreen product they used. The mother and three young children are now suing the company that makes the sunscreen and the retailer that sold it to them. The woman and her husband went to Cuba for a holiday in April 2023 along with their children, now aged 13, 10 and six, says a statement of claim she filed this month at the Court of King's Bench in Winnipeg. Before leaving, they went to a Walmart store in Winnipeg and bought a bottle of Banana Boat Ultra Sport SPF 50 sunscreen to take with them. While on vacation, the mother applied the sunscreen to herself and the children in the manner outlined in the directions on the product, according to the statement of claim. Shortly after the sunscreen was applied, the mom and her children felt a "burning sensation" on the skin where the product was applied, the court document says. Thinking that the burning sensation could have been caused by sun exposure, they reapplied the sunscreen about two hours later. Vacation 'transformed into a nightmare': suit "After applying the sunscreen for a second time, the plaintiffs felt excruciating and unbearable pain, akin to feeling acid on their skin," the claim says. The mother had skin wounds on her forehead, chest, arms, shoulder, back and knees, it says. Her daughter got wounds and rashes on her shoulders and arms, according to the lawsuit, while the now 10-year-old boy had wounds on his shoulders, back, face, ears and arms, and his six-year-old brother had wounds on his face, ears, and forearms. "What was supposed to be a relaxing and joyful family vacation quickly transformed into a nightmare," the court document says. The pain from the wounds got worse, forcing the family to stay out of the sun for the rest of the trip and miss out on some non-refundable excursions they had planned, the lawsuit claims. It says that when the family returned to Winnipeg, they were "covered in fluid-filled blisters" and discovered they had chemical burns on their skin resulting from the sunscreen. The allegations in the statement of claim have not been tested in court and the defendants have not filed defence statements. Sunscreen contained carcinogenic benzene: lawsuit The mother and three children are all plaintiffs in the lawsuit, with the mother serving as litigation guardian for the youths. They're suing the manufacturer and distributor of the Banana Boat brand sunscreen, Edgewell Personal Care Canada ULC, as well as Walmart Canada Corp., which was the retailer. The lawsuit alleges that Edgewell made or distributed a sunscreen that was defective and unsafe for use. The court document claims the Banana Boat sunscreen was made with the chemical compound benzene, which Edgewell "knew or ought to have known was harmful to human skin and has carcinogenic properties." The court document alleges Edgewell failed to put a warning on the sunscreen bottle about any potential adverse effects that could happen from applying the product. It also alleges Walmart and its employees had a duty to ensure the sunscreen it was selling was safe. Walmart failed to notify its employees about the dangers associated with the product, the claim says. A spokesperson for Edgewell said in a statement the company does not comment on open litigation. An emailed statement from Stephanie Fusco, Walmart Canada's senior manager of corporate affairs, said the company is aware of the complaint, but since it's an ongoing legal matter, it cannot comment further. Fusco said the sunscreen product at issue in the lawsuit is currently available for sale. CBC reached out to the plaintiff's lawyer for comment on the case but had not received a response prior to publication.
