The plaintiff brought a motion for leave to amend the statement of claim to correct an alleged misnomer, seeking to substitute his mother as the plaintiff after the limitation period had expired.
A previous motion to add the mother as a plaintiff had been dismissed.
The court dismissed the misnomer motion, finding that the original naming of the plaintiff was intentional and tactical, not an error.
Furthermore, the court held that the motion constituted an abuse of process because it relied on evidence that contradicted the plaintiff's position on the prior motion.
