Background:

• Incident: William Johnson suffered two strokes in October 2012. The first was minor; the second, on October 30, 2012, was severe.
• Initial Treatment: After the first stroke, Mr. Johnson was admitted and treated for a vertebral artery dissection. He was discharged on October 23, 2012, with Aspirin, without reviewing an MR angiogram (MRA).
• Second Stroke: On October 30, 2012, despite being on Heparin, he suffered a major stroke resulting in significant long-term disabilities.

Trial Court Findings:

• The trial court concluded the plaintiffs did not prove causation between the October 23 discharge and the second stroke. Dr. Caplan's evidence (plaintiffs' expert) was not accepted, while Dr. Gladstone's (defense expert) was. The case was dismissed.

Appeal Grounds:

1. Trial by Ambush: The appellants argued the trial judge wrongfully admitted undisclosed expert opinions from Dr. Gladstone.
2. Prima Facie Case: The appellants claimed they established a prima facie case on causation, which the respondents did not sufficiently rebut.

Court of Appeal Findings:

• No Trial by Ambush: Even if Dr. Gladstone’s opinion was admitted without prior disclosure, it did not prejudice the outcome. He reverted to his original stance under cross-examination.
• Prima Facie Case Not Established: The court held that both Heparin and Aspirin have similar efficacy in preventing secondary strokes, as supported by scientific evidence.

Conclusion:

• The appeal was dismissed. The trial judge’s decision to favor Dr. Gladstone’s evidence over Dr. Caplan’s was reasonable and supported by scientific literature.
• The respondents were awarded costs of $40,000.