On May 4, 2022, Dan explained limitations issues that arise in MVA litigation to participants in Osgoode's Certificate in Motor Vehicle Accident Law and Practice programme.

In Restoule v. Canada (Attorney General), the Court cited Dan’s post on the lower court decision and its discussion of "classifying the action".

In Grant Thornton LLP v. New Brunswick, the Supreme Court cited Dan’s paper “Claims, Not Causes of Action: The Misapprehension of Limitations Principles” on the distinction between the “claim” and the “cause of

Dan successfully opposed a leave motion from a lower court decision finding that the basic limitation period applies to a bad faith claim against an auto insurer.

In Luhning v Hnatyshyn, the Court cited the text on the limitation of anticipatory breach claims.

In Cochrane v. HFX Broadcasting, the Court cited the text’s comments on the limitation of a claim arising from an employee-initiated termination.

Dan defeated a limitations defence based on the application of the limitation period in s. 259.1 of the Insurance Act to a bad faith claim.  The court decided this novel issue by concluding

In R. v. Hodgson, the Court cited the text on the distinction between substantive and procedural limitation provisions.

On April 29, 2021, Dan will be speaking (from the comfort of his home office) on discoverability in personal injury litigation at the 16th Annual Osgoode Update on Personal Injury Law and Practice.

On January 20, 2021, the Ontario Court of Appeal delivered its decision in Kaynes v. BP p.l.c., which cites Dan's paper "Claims, Not Causes of Action" for its distinction between the cause of