Joseph D. Kennedy

The plaintiff mother brought a motion for partial summary judgment to rectify title to farmland registered in her name 'in trust' for her two defendant daughters, claiming the trust designation was a mistake by her lawyer.

The daughters counterclaimed for a constructive trust based on their contributions to the farm.

The court dismissed the motion, finding it procedurally barred because rectification of title under the Land Titles Act must be sought by application, not within an action.

Furthermore, the court held that even if procedurally proper, partial summary judgment was inappropriate due to significant overlapping factual disputes requiring a trial.

The applicants sought to remove their brother as their mother's Power of Attorney for Personal Care, alleging he failed to fulfill his duties by restricting their access to her, relocating her without consultation, and failing to act in her best interests.

The court found no evidence of misconduct or neglect, noting the respondent acted in accordance with the mother's wishes for privacy and made reasonable decisions regarding her care.

The application to remove the respondent was dismissed, but the court ordered him to provide an informal accounting of the mother's finances to reduce family conflict.

The plaintiff employer sued its former bookkeeper and her husband's estate for damages resulting from employee theft.

The bookkeeper had previously pleaded guilty to fraud and paid $100,000 in restitution, but the employer claimed the stolen amount was much higher.

Following a summary judgment motion, a trial of the issue was ordered to determine the exact amount stolen and the extent of the husband's unjust enrichment.

Relying on forensic accounting evidence and estimating the loss despite destroyed records, the court found the bookkeeper stole $204,670.

The claim for unjust enrichment against the husband's estate was dismissed due to insufficient evidence to quantify the enrichment.

Judgment was granted for the remaining $104,670.