The defendants submitted a requisition to stay a defamation action under Rule 2.1.01, arguing the self-represented plaintiff was an alias for a declared vexatious litigant.
The court declined to stay the action, noting that evidence is inadmissible on a Rule 2.1.01 requisition, making it impossible to conclude the plaintiff was an alias.
Furthermore, the court found the statement of claim was not clearly frivolous or abusive on its face, leaving the defendants to seek dismissal through other procedural means.
