In the case of Imeri et al v. Laidman et al, dated September 8, 2023, defendant TD General Insurance Company ("TD") had brought a motion for summary judgment, seeking a resolution to a legal dispute involving the plaintiff, Mergim Imeri. The case had originated from a motor vehicle accident that had occurred on August 27, 2013, in which Imeri, a pedestrian, had been struck by a vehicle insured by TD. Initially, TD had provided statutory accident benefits ("SABS") to Imeri, but it had later been determined that Aviva Insurance Company ("Aviva") was the appropriate insurer to provide these benefits. Aviva had been obligated to reimburse TD for the benefits already paid. On July 28, 2020, Imeri had settled his claim for accident benefits with Aviva and had released Aviva from any further claims. However, the claim against TD had remained, focusing on punitive and aggravated damages due to TD's alleged mishandling of the SABS issue. TD had brought a motion for summary judgment based on three grounds: 1) Imeri had failed to mediate the issue of punitive and exemplary damages as required by law, 2) Imeri's settlement with Aviva had negated his ability to pursue punitive and aggravated damages against TD, and 3) TD had argued that Imeri had not provided sufficient evidence to establish his claims. Ultimately, the court had granted TD's motion for summary judgment and had dismissed Imeri's claims against TD. TD had been awarded costs of $25,000 for both the motion and the action.