Court File and Parties
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Moldaver, Gillese and Armstrong JJ.A.
BETWEEN:
Fermino Susin
Applicant (Respondent)
and
John Susin
Appellant(Respondent)
COUNSEL:
Paul H. Starkman, for the appellant
Marc DiGirolamo, for the respondent
Heard and endorsed: March 11, 2009
On appeal from the order of Justice Joseph W. Quinn of the Superior Court of Justice dated July 23, 2008.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1]
Analysis
Although the reasons of the motion judge are sparse, a review of the record shows that there was ample evidence to support his finding that the appellant is a vexatious litigant. His conduct in this case is indicative of his persistent and unwarranted pursuit of legal proceedings that are both meritless and frivolous. His conduct has resulted in enormous inconvenience and expense, over many, many years, to opposing litigants and in this era of strained court resources, he can no longer be permitted unrestrained access to the courts of Ontario.
[2]
Fresh Evidence
The proposed fresh evidence lacks cogency and in our view, would not have affected the result. Accordingly, the fresh evidence application is dismissed.
[3]
Cross-Examination
Finally, Quinn J. did not err in refusing to allow the appellant to cross-examine on Fermino Susin’s affidavit. The right of cross-examination is not absolute and Quinn J. did not err in refusing it here, where the focus was not the merits of any outstanding proceedings but whether the conditions precedent to a s. 140 order had been met.
[4]
Disposition
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Costs to the respondent fixed at $5,000 inclusive of G.S.T. and disbursements.
