Matthew Louis Ofelein Certosimo

The defendant municipality brought a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s civil action for failure to comply with multiple interlocutory cost orders.

The plaintiff had failed for several years to pay costs awarded in prior proceedings, including $10,000 ordered following dismissal of an appeal and additional costs awarded on subsequent motions and appeals.

The court considered Rule 60.12 and subrule 57.03(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which authorize dismissal or other sanctions where a party fails to comply with interlocutory orders, including orders for payment of costs.

Finding that the plaintiff persistently refused to comply with cost orders, repeatedly delayed the action, and demonstrated no intention of satisfying the outstanding obligations, the court concluded that dismissal was the appropriate sanction.

The action was dismissed with costs.

The appellant appealed interlocutory orders of a master staying his action for failure to pay a prior costs award and granting the respondent the right to seek dismissal if the costs remained unpaid.

The master had found the appellant deliberately refused to comply with a $10,000 costs order despite having the means to pay, and imposed a stay with additional costs after extensive motion proceedings.

On appeal, the court applied the deferential standard for reviewing a master’s interlocutory order and considered the sanctions available under Rule 60.12 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The court held there was no error in law, no misapprehension of evidence, and no improper exercise of discretion.

The appeal was dismissed and additional costs were awarded against the appellant.