The defendants brought a motion under Rule 21 of the Rules of Civil Procedure seeking to strike the statement of claim for disclosing no reasonable cause of action.
The self‑represented plaintiff had served multiple unfiled amended versions of the claim and acknowledged numerous errors in the pleading.
The court held that the allegations disclosed no viable legal claim, including allegations relating to an estate while the parents were still alive, property interests not held by the plaintiff, and unsupported allegations of defamation.
The court also found that the proceeding appeared motivated by the plaintiff’s personal interest in his parents’ property and that the proper process for capacity concerns would be an application under the Substitute Decisions Act or the Health Care Consent Act.
The statement of claim was struck without leave to amend and full indemnity costs were ordered against the plaintiff.
