3 total
Application to assess solicitor accounts before a judge dismissed; matter must proceed before an assessment officer.
The applicant client sought to schedule a hearing before a judge to assess accounts rendered by his former lawyer.
The contingency fee agreement had previously been declared unenforceable by another judge, who ordered a reference for assessment.
The court held that because the contingency fee agreement was unenforceable, the assessment must proceed in the normal manner before an assessment officer, not a judge.
The application to schedule a hearing before a judge was dismissed.
Insurer's summary judgment motion dismissed; independent eyewitness testimony corroborated plaintiff's claim of an unidentified driver.
The defendant insurer brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs' action for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident.
The plaintiff driver claimed he was cut off by an unidentified vehicle, causing him to lose control and crash into a ditch.
The insurer argued the accident was solely the plaintiff's fault and that there was no corroborating evidence of an unidentified driver as required by the OPCF-44 Family Protection Endorsement.
The court heard viva voce evidence, including from a newly discovered independent eyewitness who had called 911.
The court found the eyewitness's testimony credible and reliable, corroborating the plaintiff's account.
The insurer's motion was dismissed, and partial summary judgment was granted to the plaintiffs, declaring the accident was caused by an unidentified driver and the evidentiary requirements of the OPCF-44 endorsement were met.
Board granted leave to withdraw jurisdictional dispute complaint after underlying grievance was settled.
The employer and the Sheet Metal Workers' union reached a settlement regarding a grievance and sought leave to withdraw the grievance and the related jurisdictional dispute complaint.
The Plumbers' union (Local 46), which was not a party to the settlement, objected to the withdrawal of the jurisdictional dispute complaint and argued it should proceed to adjudication.
The Board held that since the underlying grievance had been resolved, there was no continuing conflict necessitating the adjudication of the work assignment.
The Board declined to exercise its discretion to inquire further into the complaint merely to issue a declaratory order regarding trade jurisdiction.
Leave to withdraw both the complaint and the grievance was granted.
