M. Kealy

The plaintiffs brought a motion for leave to correct the name of the defendants in their statement of claim from various Sienna entities to Algoma Manor Nursing Home.

The plaintiffs alleged negligence resulting in the death of a resident at the nursing home.

The court found that the 'litigating finger' was clearly pointed at Algoma Manor Nursing Home in the original pleading, as it was specifically referenced and was the only nursing home in the town.

The court held this was a case of misnomer and that the proposed defendant would suffer no actual prejudice.

The motion to correct the misnomer was granted.

The plaintiff brought a motion to amend the statement of claim to add Wynn's Property Maintenance Ltd. as a defendant in a slip and fall action, and initially sought to add two other corporate entities but abandoned that request.

Wynn's opposed the motion, arguing the limitation period had expired.

The court found that the claim against Wynn's was discovered on February 4, 2019, when the plaintiff's counsel was informed of Wynn's identity.

Due to the suspension of limitation periods under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act, the motion was brought within time, and leave to add Wynn's was granted.

The court also awarded $3,500 in costs to the two corporate entities that the plaintiff abandoned its motion against, finding the plaintiff failed to conduct proper due diligence before seeking to add them.

The plaintiff was injured when she tripped on a dumbbell during an exercise class at the defendant's gym.

The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff signed a membership agreement with an exclusion of liability clause and that there was no negligence.

The court found the exclusion clause was not binding because the defendant failed to take reasonable steps to bring it to the plaintiff's attention under s. 5(3) of the Occupiers' Liability Act.

However, the court granted summary judgment dismissing the action, finding no negligence by the defendant, as the risk of a round dumbbell rolling was obvious and required no warning.

The court also ruled the plaintiff's expert evidence inadmissible.