Alexander Hartwig

The plaintiff sought to amend her claim to proceed under Rule 76 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, capping damages at $200,000, after the action had been set down for a jury trial.

The court dismissed the motion, finding the prejudice to the defendant too great and the timing of the amendment to be an abuse of process.

The decision discusses the availability of accommodations for disabled litigants, the prejudice inherent in late procedural changes, and the tactical nature of the plaintiff’s request.

In this personal injury action, the defendants sought production of the complete and unredacted file of the Family and Children’s Services of Frontenac, Lennox and Addington (FCS) concerning the plaintiffs from 2014 to present.

The plaintiffs opposed, arguing it was a fishing expedition and that the utility of the records would be tangential.

The court dismissed the defendants' motion, finding that the burden for production of such highly intrusive records is high, and the prejudicial effect of disclosure greatly outweighed any potential benefit to the defendants, especially given that the information sought was likely of tangential relevance.

The plaintiff brought a motion in writing under Rule 7.08 of the Rules of Civil Procedure for approval of a proposed settlement on behalf of a minor injured in a motor vehicle accident.

The court found the evidentiary record insufficient to determine whether the settlement was in the minor's best interest, noting missing information regarding liability, the minor's medical prognosis, the breakdown of the settlement amount, and legal fees.

The court directed the moving party to provide additional materials within 60 days and ordered the materials to be served on the Children's Lawyer for a report and recommendations.