The defendant municipality brought a motion to strike the plaintiff bridge company's statement of claim, which sought contribution and indemnity for damages and legal costs arising from five nuisance actions brought by local residents.
The residents alleged that the plaintiff's boarded-up houses caused urban blight.
The plaintiff claimed the municipality unlawfully withheld demolition permits, causing the nuisance.
The court dismissed the motion to strike, finding it was not plain and obvious that the claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action, and that the action was not an abuse of process nor barred by issue estoppel.
The plaintiff was granted leave to amend its pleadings to better particularize misfeasance in public office and negligence.
