Desiree Smith

The Court of Appeal for Ontario considered a motion by Mary McInnis, acting in person, for an extension of time to perfect her appeal in estate litigation, and a cross-motion by Sharon Hartin to dismiss the appeal for delay.

The court found that transcripts were required for the appeal and that the perfection deadline had not yet begun, rendering the extension motion moot.

The court declined to dismiss the appeal for delay, citing the appellant’s self-represented status, confusion over the rules, and lack of prejudice to the respondent.

The court imposed a deadline for the appellant to order transcripts or seek relief, failing which the respondent may move for dismissal for delay.

The applicants challenged the capacity of Anastasia Helen Troy ("Ann") when she signed her 2022 will and powers of attorney (POAs), alleging incapacity and undue influence.

They sought a declaration that Ann is currently incapable, appointment as guardians, and an accounting.

The respondents moved to dismiss the application.

The court dismissed the challenge to the will, stating it cannot be challenged while the testator is alive.

However, the court found sufficient "suspicious circumstances" to allow the challenge to the 2022 POAs to proceed, noting concerns about Ann's cognitive decline and the respondents' conduct.

The court denied the request for an accounting at this stage due to no direct evidence of mismanagement but granted directions for medical record disclosure and ordered parties to conduct themselves respectfully around Ann.

The applicant, Sharon Hartin, objected to the accounts of the respondent, Mary McInnis, in her capacities as attorney for property and estate trustee of Anna Evelyn Hartin's estate.

The applicant alleged undue influence, improper transfers, failure to keep proper records, and breach of court orders.

The court found a presumption of undue influence arose due to the deceased's dependency on the respondent, which the respondent largely failed to rebut.

The court also found the respondent acted as attorney for property and failed to keep adequate records.

The court ordered the respondent to reimburse the estate $127,167.70, revoked her Certificate of Appointment as Estate Trustee, and denied her compensation.