1 total
Motion allowed decision
The Superior Court of Justice considered a Rule 2.1 review initiated by defendants Geoff Pollock & Associates and Nisha Subba, concerning an action and motion brought by plaintiff Daniel Irmya.
Irmya had filed a Notice of Action claiming significant damages for conversion, unjust enrichment, and fraud related to a real estate transaction, but failed to file a Statement of Claim.
He subsequently filed a motion seeking various orders, including permission to represent plaintiff trusts and extensive financial disclosure from the defendants.
The court found Irmya's motion record to be vexatious on its face and the relief sought either unavailable or premature.
Consequently, the court ordered a Rule 2.1 notice to be issued to Irmya, indicating a potential dismissal of his motion and the entire action, and stayed all proceedings pending the outcome of this review.
