The defendant moved to strike a new action for unjust enrichment as an abuse of process, arguing the plaintiff should have sought leave to add her to an existing related action.
The plaintiff cross-moved to consolidate the actions.
The defendant also moved to stay the action or strike the plaintiff's affidavit because the plaintiff spoke to his counsel during a break in a virtual cross-examination.
The court dismissed the motion to strike, finding the new action was not an abuse of process as it involved a new party.
The court allowed the consolidation motion.
While the court found a breach of cross-examination rules occurred during the virtual break, it held that staying the action or striking the affidavit was a disproportionate remedy given the innocuous nature of the discussion.
