Krista L. Springstead

This decision addresses a Rule 2.1.01 motion concerning multiple proceedings commenced by the plaintiff, Aynoush Biniaz-Sarabi, arising from a motor vehicle accident and subsequent denial of accident benefits.

The court reviews the history of related litigation, including prior decisions by the Licence Appeal Tribunal and Divisional Court, and considers whether the current and related actions are frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

Several actions are dismissed under Rule 2.1.01, and the court declines to declare the plaintiff a vexatious litigant without a formal motion.

The defendant, Himelfarb Proszanski, brought a motion under Rule 2.1.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the plaintiff's action as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process.

The plaintiff, Aynoush Biniaz-Sarabi, was self-represented and opposed the motion.

The court found that the statement of claim lacked a basis for liability against the defendant, constituted an impermissible collateral attack on a prior License Appeal Tribunal decision regarding accident benefits, and was virtually identical to another action commenced by the plaintiff the day prior.

Consequently, the court dismissed the action without costs.

The defendants, Unifund Assurance Company, Dr. Henry Rosenblat, Dr. Michael Hanna, and Kenneth Wace, brought a motion under Rule 2.1.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the plaintiff's action, arguing it was frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process.

The plaintiff, Yong Wang, alleged a conspiracy to deprive him of statutory accident benefits, including allegations of forged signatures and improper medical reports.

Applying the 'clearest of cases' standard for Rule 2.1 motions, the court found that despite drafting deficiencies and seemingly far-fetched claims, the allegations could not be dismissed on their face as frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

The court declined to grant the dismissal order, emphasizing the high threshold for Rule 2.1.