C. Belsito

The moving parties (defendants by counterclaim) brought a motion for summary judgment on their counterclaim for defamation and loss of business reputation against the responding party (plaintiff).

The responding party had previously brought an action claiming ownership of a classic Ferrari, which was dismissed.

After the moving parties purchased the vehicle and sold it to a third party, the responding party's counsel sent an email to an auction house falsely claiming the vehicle was stolen.

The court found the statements were defamatory, false, and not protected by qualified privilege.

The court awarded $500,000 in damages for loss of business reputation due to the abrupt end of a profitable business relationship caused by the defamatory statements.

The claim for punitive damages was dismissed.

The plaintiff brought actions claiming ownership of a 1973 Dino Ferrari and interests in his parents' motel business, alleging improper conversion of assets by his mother's attorneys for property.

The defendants moved for summary judgment.

The court found that the motel was a partnership between the parents, the plaintiff was merely an employee, and the Ferrari was an asset of the motel business despite being registered in the plaintiff's name.

The court dismissed the plaintiff's claims for unjust enrichment, oppression under the Business Corporations Act, and conversion of personal property, granting summary judgment in favour of the defendants.