David J. Thrasher

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment based on a fraudulent overbilling scheme, and the defendant brought a cross-motion for production of financial records referred to in the plaintiff's forensic accounting report.

The court granted summary judgment to the plaintiff on liability, as the defendant admitted to participating in the scheme.

However, the court granted the defendant's motion for document production, finding the records relevant to the defendant's argument that the plaintiff suffered no actual loss because the losses were covered by other over-inflated invoices.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment granting an adverse possession claim.

The respondents conceded that the trial judge erred in treating the matter as a case of mistake, which led to the application of the wrong test.

Specifically, the trial judge failed to consider whether there was an intention to exclude the owners from the uses they wanted to make of their property.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment, and dismissed the action, awarding costs to the appellant.