The plaintiffs sued the police for negligence after the plaintiff was severely injured in a drive-by shooting, alleging the police knew he was a likely target but failed to warn him or arrest the known shooter.
The defendants appealed a motion judge's decision dismissing their motion to strike the claim.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the amended statement of claim pleaded sufficient material facts to establish a relationship of proximity analogous to the recognized duty of care in Jane Doe, and it was not plain and obvious that the claim would fail.
