2 total
Action for joint ownership and shared possession of a dog dismissed; pets are personal property.
The plaintiff brought an action against his former romantic partner seeking specific performance of an alleged agreement to share possession of a dog, or alternatively, compensation for expenses incurred for its care.
The court dismissed the action, finding that the defendant was the sole owner of the dog, having paid the full purchase price and assumed primary responsibility for its care.
The court reiterated that pets are personal property and declined to impose a shared possession regime.
The plaintiff's claim for unjust enrichment was also dismissed, as his financial contributions were modest and voluntarily made within the context of a domestic relationship.
Limitation motion dismissed; deceased's alleged incapacity tolled the statutory period.
The defendants, a real estate agent and his brokerage, brought a motion under r. 21.01(1)(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the plaintiff estate trustee's action as statute-barred under s. 38(3) of the Trustee Act or s. 4 of the Limitations Act, 2002.
The action alleged that the defendants conspired to purchase property from a cognitively impaired deceased at below fair market value.
The court found the claim was statute-barred under the Trustee Act's strict two-year period and that fraudulent concealment could not toll the limitation because no concealment occurred after the deceased's death.
However, the court held that the limitation period was suspended under s. 7 of the Limitations Act, 2002 due to the deceased's alleged incapacity, and dismissed the motion.
