2 total
The court dismissed the defendants' motion for summary judgment, finding genuine issues for trial regarding the validity of a settlement release and professional negligence.
The defendants, an insurance company and a public adjuster, brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs' action concerning a fire insurance claim.
The plaintiffs alleged the settlement and release were unfair due to an imbalance of bargaining power and the defendants' negligence/bad faith.
The court dismissed the summary judgment motion, finding genuine issues for trial regarding the validity and clarity of the release, the professional negligence claims against the adjuster, and whether expert evidence on the standard of care was required given the alleged egregious conduct.
The court emphasized caution against granting partial summary judgment due to risks of delay, expense, and inconsistent findings.
Motions for partial summary judgment dismissed due to intertwined facts and risk of inconsistent findings.
The plaintiff was injured after slipping on ice on a municipal sidewalk after exiting a bus.
She sued the City of Toronto and the TTC, and later added the City's winter maintenance contractor, Pave-Tar.
Pave-Tar and the TTC brought motions for partial summary judgment to dismiss the claims against them.
Pave-Tar argued the claim against it was statute-barred, while the TTC argued it owed no duty of care.
The court dismissed both motions, finding a genuine issue for trial regarding the limitation period and concluding that partial summary judgment was inappropriate due to the intertwined facts and risk of inconsistent findings at trial.
