L. Campbell

This decision addresses three motions: the defendants' motion to dismiss the action for delay and discharge a certificate of pending litigation, the plaintiff's cross-motion to compel discovery and strike the defense, and the defendants' motion for security for costs.

The court dismissed the defendants' motions, finding that the plaintiff's delay was not inordinate or inexcusable, particularly given the defendants' own defaults in discovery obligations.

The court granted the plaintiff's motion, ordering the defendants to provide an affidavit of documents and attend examinations for discovery within a set timetable.

The motion for security for costs was also dismissed, emphasizing the serious nature of the allegations of fraudulent asset stripping.

The respondent moved to set aside a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) that had been granted ex parte to the applicants concerning a property.

The court granted the motion, discharging the CPL and awarding costs to the respondent.

The reasons included the applicants' lack of full and frank disclosure on the ex parte motion, failure to establish the property's uniqueness, significant unexplained delay in seeking the CPL, and the prejudice to a bona fide third-party purchaser.

The court found the applicants' claim for damages would remain, and the balance of harm favored vacating the CPL.

The appellant mother appealed an order denying her leave to bring a Motion to Change a final order regarding custody, access, and support.

The lower court had denied leave because the mother had not paid a $30,000 costs order, which was a prerequisite for bringing further proceedings.

The Superior Court held that an absolute prohibition on proceedings involving a child's best interests for non-payment of costs is unenforceable, and the court must consider whether there are reasonable grounds for the proposed motion.

The court granted leave to bring a Motion to Change regarding access and assessment issues, finding reasonable grounds that the respondent father was capriciously exercising his absolute discretion over access, but denied leave regarding custody, support, and contempt.